The Supreme Court supported the draft law on the “manual” Grand Chamber
At the Plenum, the Supreme Court supported MP Pavlish’s draft law No. 9643-1 on changing the structure of the Grand Chamber, which foresees creating a weak and dependent Grand Chamber.
Notably, the decision received 75 votes in favour, while 31 votes opposed it during the Plenum session. It’s worth mentioning that there were initially 129 judges present at the Plenum. The whereabouts of the remaining 23 votes remain unclear. The voting process allowed only two options, making it apparent that several judges either abstained from voting or left the session prematurely. This situation raises questions about the legitimacy of the outcome, as the law stipulates that a Plenum meeting holds authority only when at least two-thirds of the judges are present. Nevertheless, the President of the Supreme Court, Stanislav Kravchenko, announced after the vote that “we will not recount those present in the hall”.
What does draft law No. 9643-1 propose:
- The ability for courts of cassation to remove Grand Chamber judges prematurely and appoint new ones. This change aims to create a more selective composition of the Chamber for specific cases.
- The allocation of “political” administrative cases pertaining to the highest state bodies to all Grand Chamber judges, irrespective of their field of specialization. This measure is intended to ensure that only the “required” judges participate in such cases.
- The transfer of several powers from the Grand Chamber to the courts of cassation, thereby weakening the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court. It is noteworthy that some of the courts of cassation still have personnel from the times of Portnov and Yanukovych.
