Two current MPs from the “Servant of the People” are candidates for the Constitutional Court. This violates the Constitution - 1B04D
Back

Two current MPs from the “Servant of the People” are candidates for the Constitutional Court. This violates the Constitution

The Parliament announced candidates for the post of judge of the Constitutional Court (CCU) under its quota.

It seems that the authorities are in no hurry to stop the practice of political bias of judges, which is the main source of problems in the Constitutional Court: the list includes two MPs from “Servant of the People”, Oleksandr Kopylenko, deputy head of the Committee on Foreign Policy, and Pavlo Pavlish, deputy head of the Legal Committee. This violates the requirement of the Constitution for the political independence of judges of the Constitutional Court, which is laid down in Article 148.

Of note is MP Pavlish’s involvement in proposing several contentious draft laws. In March of this year, he advocated for limiting access to the court register (No. 7033-д) and withholding the recording of court hearings (No. 8359). His latest draft law, No. 9643-1, introduces new mechanisms for control and political influence over the Supreme Court, as analysed here.

This politicisation of the CCU is not an isolated incident. Last year, despite constitutional and Venice Commission objections, the Verkhovna Rada appointed its “Servant of the People” MP, Olga Sovhyria, as a Constitutional Court judge. At that time, she was a member of the same Legal Committee.

Obviously, the authorities have recognised the success of this approach and persist in its implementation. The associated risks of further politicising the Constitutional Court are considerable—ranging from approving elections during times of war to potentially overturning crucial European integration reforms, as witnessed in 2020.

A notable difference in the current scenario is the involvement of the Advisory Group of Experts, which includes international experts, in the preliminary selection of candidates. The risks associated with its formation are outlined here. Thus, there will be an opportunity to check how effective the mechanism is.

There are also decent candidates on the list. We hope that a person who meets the criteria of political independence, integrity and high professional skills will be appointed to the CCU.

Other news
To the section
New rules bring new risks. What the draft law on the selection of HCJ members changes
New rules bring new risks. What the draft law on the selection of HCJ members changes

The government’s draft law submitted to the Venice Commission for consideration, in addition to a new procedure for forming the HQCJ, also substantially changes the procedures for electing (appointing) members of the High Council of Justice (HCJ). The proposed changes may create new risks for...

The government proposes a “broken bicycle” for international experts in the commission selecting HQCJ members
The government proposes a “broken bicycle” for international experts in the commission selecting HQCJ members

The High Qualifications Commission of Judges (HQCJ) is a body that can recommend a person for the position of judge or recommend their dismissal. That is, whoever decides your case, should you suddenly have to go to court, depends on the HQCJ’s assessment. Judges over judges, so to speak. Logi...

DACK cases and judges can end up in the same court again
DACK cases and judges can end up in the same court again

The High Qualifications Commission of Judges (HQCJ) has recommended transferring 6 judges of the liquidated DACK to the Kyiv District Administrative Court (KDAC). All the cases of the liquidated DACK had previously been transferred to the KDAC as well. In other words, the nameplate has changed, but...

Special by topic
To the section
Bar Reform Roadmap
Supreme Court Unmasked: Corruption, Opposing Reforms and Russian Passports
Judicial Reform Roadmap