Аналітика

25

січня

2015

Certificate of implementation of the recommendations made by the bodies of the Council of Europe into the Draft Law No. 1497 and into the Draft Law No. 1556

No

Recommendation and its source

Implementation of the recommendations in the Draft Law No. 1497 of 17.12.2014 “On Amending the Law of Ukraine “On Court Organisation and the Status of Judges”

concerning the improvement of principles of organisation and functioning of the judicial power

according to European standards

 (initiated by a group of People’s Deputies of Ukraine)

Implementation of the recommendations in the Presidential Administration’s Draft Law No. 1656 of 26.12.2014 “On Ensuring the Right to a Fair Trial” (initiated by the President of Ukraine)

1.        

To create a body independent of the legislative and executive powers – a body in charge of appointing and promoting judges. To abolish the system which provides for the involvement of legislative or executive bodies in the procedure of electing judges to the Council of Justice.

para. 40-41 CCJE (2001) OP N1

para. 31 CCJE (2007) Op. N 10

The qualification commission of judges is formed without the participation of the legislative and executive powers. Candidates for judges to the High Council of Justice, to be appointed by the President, the Parliament and other entities, will be nominated by (or coordinated with) the Council of Judges of Ukraine. This will contribute to the independence of these bodies from the legislative and executive powers.

The High Qualification Commission of Judges is formed without the participation of the legislative and executive powers. The Draft Law provides for the election of members to the High Council of Justice on a competitive and public basis.

2.        

To ensure that the majority of the members of the High Council of Justice, or at least its essential part, consists of judges.

para. 35 CPL-AD (2013)014

11 out of 20 members of the High Council of Justice will be selected from the pool of judges or retired judges with the participation of judges (Council of Judges of Ukraine).

11 out of 20 members of the High Council of Justice will be selected from the pool of judges or retired judges, but without the participation of judges.

3.        

To remove the representative of the Ministry of Justice from the High Qualifications Commission.

para. 81. CDL-AD(2010)026

There will be no representative of the Ministry of Justice in the new Qualifications and Disciplinary Commission. He will only be on the Commission during the transition period.

There will be no representative of the Ministry of Justice in the High Qualifications Commission. He will only be on the Commission during the transition period.

4.        

To ensure that the High Council of Justice works as a continuing body.

para. 113. The judgment of the ECHR (application no. 21722/11)

The members of the High Council of Justice will exercise their power on a regular basis. For the period of exercising their power they will be delegated to the High Council of Justice (except for those serving on the Council by virtue of their position).

The members of the High Council of Justice will exercise their power on a regular basis. For the period of exercising their power they will be delegated to the High Council of Justice (except for those serving on the Council by virtue of their position).

5.        

To guarantee the continuity of the activity of the High Council of Justice (Council of Judges). Its members should not be replaced at the same time.

para. 35 CCJE (2007) Op. no. 10

The composition of the Council of Judges of Ukraine will change by one-third every two years.

Rotation of members of the High Council of Justice and the Council of Judges of Ukraine is not provided for. It is likely that their powers will expire at the same time.

6.        

To ensure that the judges of all levels enjoy equal authority at the High Council of Justice elections and that judges of the highest courts do not have a stronger position in the election.

para. 37 CPL-AD (2013)014

At the Congress of Judges, which will elect the members of the High Council of Justice, courts of all types and levels will be represented proportionally.

At the Congress of Judges, which will elect the members of the High Council of Justice, courts of all types and levels will be represented proportionally. In fact, however, delegates to the congress of judges from local courts of general jurisdiction will be “filtered” during the meeting of appeal court judges, which does not follow the recommendation.

7.        

To abandon specification of the number of disciplinary inspectors at the legal level.

para. 80 CDL-AD(2010)026

The Draft Law does not specify the number of members of the inspection service.

The Draft Law provides for an increase in the number of inspectors to 42, which does not follow the recommendation.

8.        

To put the following matters under the jurisdiction of the Council of Judges (High Council of Justice): elections, encouragement, studies, promotion, immunity, transferring, disciplinary liability and dismissal of judges.

para. 19 CPL-AD (2013)014

para. 14 CDL-AD(2010)004

para. 5 CDL-AD (2007)028

para. 70 CDL-AD(2010)026

para. 53 CDL-AD (2011)033

The Council of Judges of Ukraine will transfer judges based on the results of the contest; it will approve the statute of the National School of Judges. The High Council of Justice will continue performing its functions specified in the Constitution. After the changes have been made to the Constitution, it would be appropriate to amalgamate the Council of Judges, the Qualifications and Disciplinary Commission and the High Council of Justice into a single body.

Final decisions on appointment, promotion and dismissal of judges remain within the competence of the President of Ukraine and the Parliament of Ukraine.

9.        

To entrust the judiciary with the responsibility for organising and supervising judicial training. The conception of the training programs and their implementation should be entrusted to a special autonomous body (a training academy) under the authority of the judiciary (preferably the Council of Justice) with its own budget and which should work in consultation with judges. A clear division of functions should be encouraged between the Council of Justice and the training academy.

para. 65 CCJE (2007) Op. N 10

The National School of Judges will belong under the jurisdiction of the Council of Judges of Ukraine, since the latter will approve the statute of the School. The School will be responsible both for the primary training of the future judges and for their further training during their career.

The National School of Judges will belong under the jurisdiction of the High Qualification Commission of Judges. The School will be responsible both for the primary training of the future judges and for their further training during their career. The training program, the curriculum and the procedure for undergoing a special training course for judicial candidates will be approved by the High Qualification Commission based on the data presented by the National School of Judges of Ukraine.

10.     

To entrust the Council of Justice (or the Council of Judges) with advisory powers, thus authorising it to provide its opinions on all draft texts relating to the status of judges, the administration of justice, procedural law and, more generally, all draft legislation likely to have an impact on the judiciary (including the independence of the judiciary or measures which might diminish citizens' guarantee of access to justice). These draft bills should be approved by the Council of Justice before deliberation by Parliament.

para. 87 CCJE (2007) Op. N 10

The Council of Judges of Ukraine will provide opinions on the draft laws and other acts relating to the court organisation, status of judges, legal proceedings; it will also take part in the budgetary process.

Opinions on the draft laws will be provided by the Supreme Court and other specialized courts; the Council of Judges is not authorised to do this.

11.     

To reduce the number of levels of judicial self-government.

para. 93 CDL-AD(2010)026

The only organisational forms of judicial self-government will be as follows: meetings of judges in every court, the Council of Judges of Ukraine, the Congress of Judges of Ukraine. The draft laws provide for the abolition of conferences and councils of judges of specialized courts.

The organisational forms of judicial self-government will be as follows: meetings of judges in every court, conferences of judges of specialized courts, the Council of Judges of Ukraine, the Congress of Judges of Ukraine. The draft laws provide only for the abolition of councils of judges of specialized courts.

12.     

To avoid the duplication of powers of different bodies of judicial self-government.

para. 93 CDL-AD(2010)026

Reducing the number of levels of judicial self-government and clearly defining the powers of meetings of judges, the Council of Judges of Ukraine and the Congress of Judges of Ukraine will aid avoidance of the duplication of powers.

The number of levels of judicial self-government has hardly been reduced, so duplication remains as it was.

13.     

To provide for a more proportionate representation of judges when electing delegates to the Congress of Judges of Ukraine. To replace the principle of “equal representation of each judicial jurisdiction” with a more proportionate means of election.

para. 129 (22) CDL-AD(2010)026

The Draft Law preserves the principle of forming the composition of the Congress of Judges of Ukraine by delegates, on the basis of one delegate from a certain number of judges. This principle was introduced by the Law “On Restoring Trust in the Judicial Powers of Ukraine”. Apart from this, the law eliminates certain problems and reduces conflicts related to defining the delegate election procedure.

The Draft Law preserves the principle of forming the composition of the Congress of Judges of Ukraine by delegates. This principle was introduced by the Law “On Restoring Trust in the Judicial Powers of Ukraine”. However, the draft law does not eliminate certain problems and conflicts related to the defining the delegate election procedure.

14.     

To provide for a more proportionate representation of judges in the Council of Judges. To replace the principle of “equal representation of each judicial jurisdiction” with a different one, in order to bring the composition of the Council into conformity with the principle of equality.

para. 129 (23) CDL-AD(2010)026

The Draft Law preserves the principle of proportionate representation of judges in the Council of Judges of Ukraine. This principle was introduced by the Law “On Restoring Trust in the Judicial Powers of Ukraine”.

The Draft Law preserves the principle of proportionate representation of judges in the Council of Judges of Ukraine. This principle was introduced by the Law “On Restoring Trust in the Judicial Powers of Ukraine”.

15.     

To deprive a group of persons not belonging to the judiciary (President, Chairman of the Parliament of Ukraine, Commissioner of the Parliament of Ukraine for Human Rights, members of the Supreme Council of Justice, members of the High Qualification Commission of Judges, Minister of Justice) of the right to be present at the Congress of Judges.

par. 96 CDL-AD(2010)026

The Draft Law, in contrast to the current Law “On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges”, will not require an obligatory invitation for high officials to the Congress of Judges of Ukraine. The Council of Judges of Ukraine will determine the circle of invitees at their own discretion.

The Draft Law, in contrast to the current Law “On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges”, will not require an invitation for high officials to the Congress of Judges of Ukraine. The Council of Judges of Ukraine will determine the circle of invitees at their own discretion.

16.     

To abandon the mandatory invitation of the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Finance for the Judicial Council Meetings.

par. 97 CDL-AD(2010)026

The Draft Law will not require an obligatory invitation for high officials to the meetings of the Council of Judges of Ukraine. The Council of Judges of Ukraine will determine the circle of invitees at their own discretion, according to necessity.

The Draft Law will not require an obligatory invitation for high officials to the meetings of the Council of Judges of Ukraine. The Council of Judges of Ukraine will determine the circle of invitees at their own discretion, according to necessity.

17.     

To create one or more bodies within the judicial system or to appoint persons who will perform advisory functions and from whom judges could seek advice if they are unsure whether activities undertaken in their private life are compatible with the status of being a judge. The existence of such bodies or persons should encourage discussion on the meaning and significance of ethical rules in the judicial system. Such bodies or entities may be created under the auspices of the Supreme Court or the Association of Judges. In any case, these bodies should be separated from the bodies responsible for the disciplinary responsibility of judges and should pursue other goals.

par. 29 CCJE (2002) Op. N 3

The Council of Judges of Ukraine should create a Commission on Judicial Ethics for consulting judges or retired judges when addressing issues of judicial ethics and for providing recommendations on ethical behavior, prevention and settlement of conflict of interests in the activities of judges, prevention of acquisition of undue advantage or receipt of gifts prohibited by law. The Commission should also elaborate on the rules of judicial ethics.

The Draft Law does not envisage the relevant provisions.

18.     

To reduce the scope of the role of the President in the appointment and dismissal of judges in such a way that it remains purely ceremonial.

par. 12, 29 CPL-AD (2013)014

The President of Ukraine will have to appoint or remove a judge only upon a motion by the High Council of Justice. The Draft Law does not provide for any discretionary powers of the President in the appointment or dismissal of judges.

The President of Ukraine will have to appoint or remove a judge only upon a motion by the Supreme Council of Justice.

However, the President has the authority to sign the certificates of judges, to put them under oath, and so he can prevent them from acquiring the status of a judge (for example, President Poroshenko has not adjured the judges appointed by the previous President in over 9 months).

19.     

To establish a procedure governing the collection and receipt of information from each judicial candidate; candidates should be familiar with such information and have the right to appeal against it.

par. 29 (12) CDL-AD(2010)026

In the event of obtaining information which may indicate the disreputability of a judicial candidate, the Qualification Commission of Judges will consider said issue at their meeting whilst inviting that candidate. Judicial candidates should have the right to access this information, to provide appropriate explanations and to refute or deny any allegations.

In the event of obtaining information which may indicate the disreputability of a judicial candidate, the Qualification Commission of Judges will consider said issue at their meeting whilst inviting that candidate. Judicial candidates should have the right to access this information, to provide appropriate explanations and to refute or deny any allegations.

20.     

To remove the Parliament of Ukraine from the appointment of judges.

par. 16-18 CPL-AD (2013)014

The Draft Law eliminates the Supreme Council of Ukraine from the procedure of judge transfer, since the Parliament of Ukraine does not have such authority, even according to the current Constitution. At the same time, the elimination of the Parliament of Ukraine authority for the lifetime election of judges is possible only through amendments to the Constitution.

The Draft Law retains the authority of the Parliament of Ukraine to transfer judges, although the Supreme Council does not have such authority, even according to the current Constitution.

At the same time, the elimination of the Supreme Council authority for the lifetime election of judges is possible only through amendments to the Constitution.

21.     

To deprive the Supreme Council of the possibility to transfer judges.

par. 53 CDL-AD (2011)033

The Draft Law eliminates the Supreme Council of Ukraine, as well as the President of Ukraine, from the procedure of judge transfer.

The Draft Law retains the powers of the Parliament of Ukraine concerning the transfer of judges and extends the powers of the President of Ukraine.

22.     

To determine the objective criteria for the career development of judges within the indisputable law

par. 70 CDL-AD(2010)026

Any judge seeking career advancement should submit a letter of motivation along with all information which will positively indicate his merits (information on the results of advanced training at the National School of Judges, on the judge’s involvement in teaching or research work, on his participation in judicial self-government or in other areas of social life, etc.). During the competition, the qualification commission of judges organizes, in compliance with law,  monitoring of the judge’s lifestyle and conducts the questionnaire survey of the judges in the courts which employ the respective judges on the personal qualities of each candidate, his ability to work in a team; involves third parties as court visitors for an independent evaluation of the judge’s work in court proceedings; examines the disciplinary practices relating to the candidate; checks other information that may specify the personal qualities of the judge and confirms his ability to exercise his powers in a higher-level court. The decision of the qualifications commission, based on the competition results should be motivated.

Any judge seeking career advancement should have the qualification rank and length of service as a judge required for the relevant court level. Judges should be selected through the competition procedure. However, there are no criteria for obtaining the specific qualification rank.

23.     

To determine, on the legislative level, the grounds for displacement of a judge from his administrative position.

par. 25 CDL-AD (2011)033

According to The Draft Law, a judge should be dismissed from his administrative position in the following cases:

1) If he submits an application for dismissal from his administrative position on his own volition;

2) If he is summoned to work in the qualification and Disciplinary commission of judges, in the Council of Judges of Ukraine, in the High Council of Justice or National School of Judges;

3) If the High Council of Justice enters a motion for the removal of a judge.

The meeting of judges of the respective court dismisses a judge from his administrative position before the appointed time on the initiative of not less than one third of the number of judges in the respective court, by a decision taken following a secret ballot with the participation at least two-thirds of judges employed by the respective court.

The meeting of judges of the respective court dismisses a judge from his administrative position before the appointed time on the initiative of not less than one third of the number of judges in the respective court, by a decision taken following a secret ballot with the participation at least two-thirds of judges employed by the respective court.

Other reasons for early dismissal are not specified.

24.     

To include a clause providing that the member of the High Council of Justice who submitted the proposal on the judge’s dismissal shall not participate in the decision making process of the High Council concerning that judge.

par. 42 CDL-AD(2010)029

The decision of the High Council of Justice to forward the submission on the judge’s removal due to violation of oath should be based solely on the conclusion of the disciplinary commission of judges or the High Council of Justice confirming the oath violation committed by the judge and should be made as a result of a disciplinary procedure.

The member of the High Council of Justice, who raised an issue on judge dismissal before the High Council of Justice, should not participate in the voting, following which a decision is to be made.

25.     

To provide for the scale of disciplinary sanctions against judges, depending on the severity of a disciplinary offense.

par. 57 CDL-AD (2011)033

Instead of the existing reprimand and dismissal, the Draft Law envisages six types of penalties which are applied according to the principle of proportionality: admonition, reprimand, severe reprimand with deprivation of the right to receive additional payments, temporal removal with deprivation of the right to receive additional payments and with mandatory detachment of a judge to the National School of Judges for passing the refresher course specified by a disciplinary body, dismissal from office; termination of a judge’s retirement (if the decision in his disciplinary case was made after his removal).

Instead of the existing reprimand and dismissal the Draft Law envisages seven types of penalties which are applied according to the principle of proportionality: admonition, reprimand with deprivation of the right to receive additional payments to the official judge’s salary for one month; severe reprimand with deprivation of the right to receive additional payments to the official judge’s salary for three months; temporary (for one to six months) removal from the administration of justice with the deprivation of the right to receive additional payments to the official judge’s salary and with mandatory certification to prove the qualification rank; judge transfer to another court of the same level and the same specialization; lowering the qualification rank of a judge with the eventual transfer to the lower court if the lower rank obtained as a result of demotion does not allow the judge to administer justice in the court of appropriate level; conclusion about sending a recommendation to the High Council of Justice for making a decision to forward a submission on dismissal of a judge based on violation of his oath.

26.     

To define concretely the grounds for removal of a judge relating his inappropriate behavior. In particular, to specify more clearly by the legislative act the possibility of the judge’s dismissal for violating his oath. The dismissal of a judge for violating his oath is only admissible if that violation has such nature that makes it impossible for a person to occupy the position of a professional judge in future.

par. 63 CDL-AD (2011)033

par. 86 CDL-AD(2010)026

A judge may be dismissed for the following offenses:

1) use of the judge’s status with the aim to unlawfully obtain material goods or other benefits by the judge or by the third parties;

2) incurring expenses by the judge or his family  members exceeding the revenues of the judge or his family income;

3) detection of an imbalance between the judge’s living standards and the property possessed by him and his family members as well as the income obtained by them, based on the results of monitoring of judge’s lifestyle;

4) unfair behavior of the judge during the checking of his respectability by the legally authorized authority;

5) acquiring foreign citizenship by the judge without termination of the Ukrainian citizenship;

6) intentional or committed due to obvious negligence violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms (in the interpretation of international institutions, whose jurisdiction is recognized in Ukraine) by the judge who participated in adoption of the judgment;

7) self-removal of the judge from exercising his judicial powers.

A judge may be dismissed if (some of the reasons are too abstract – see items 1 and 3):

1) the judge committed acts discrediting the justiceship or undermining the authority of justice;

2) the judge committed a disciplinary offense having not cancelled disciplinary penalty (except for admonition and reprimand) or having two not cancelled disciplinary penalties;

3) the fact of unfair judicial conduct was established, including the incurring expenses by the judge or his family  members exceeding the revenues of the judge and his family income; detection of an imbalance between the judge’s living standards and the property or income declared by him and his family members; use of the judge’s status with the aim to unlawfully obtain material goods or other benefits by the judge or by the third parties;

4) the court found the judge guilty of corruption offenses or delinquency related to corruption.

27.     

To regulate the mechanism for institution of disciplinary proceedings against judges in one legislative act.

par. 44 CDL-AD(2010)029

The grounds for the disciplinary responsibility, disciplinary procedure and penalties are exhaustively defined in the draft law “On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges”. The relevant provisions were deleted from the Law “On the High Council of Justice”.

The grounds for the disciplinary responsibility and penalties are exhaustively defined in the draft law “On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges”.

However, the issues of disciplinary procedure will be simultaneously regulated by the law “On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges” and the Law “On the high Council of Justice”.

28.     

Include in the legislation judges right to apply to include a witness, participation in questioning of the witness during proceedings of disciplinary case concerning this judge.

п. 73 CDL-AD(2010)026

A judge against whom the proceedings was started, and (or) his representative have the right to give explanations, ask questions to the participants of the proceedings,  object, submit petitions and applications for withdrawal, apply to invite a witnesses.

A judge against whom the proceedings was started, and (or) his representative have the right to give explanations, apply to invite witnesses, ask questions to the participants of the proceedings, object, submit petitions and applications for withdrawal.

29.     

Describe in detail the individual rights of the defense granted to a judge. Ensure that a member Rapporteur of the High Qualifications Commission of Judges, whose position is similar to the position of the prosecutor shall be excluded from the discussion and voting.

п. 74 CDL-AD(2010)026

A judge, against whom proceedings have commenced, and (or) his representative have the right to give explanations, ask questions of participants of the proceedings,  object, submit petitions and applications for withdrawal, apply to invite a witnesses. The competence to prosecute the judge was removed from the jurisdiction of the disciplinary body.

A judge against whom proceedings have commenced, and (or) his representative have the right to give explanations,  summon witnesses, submit questions to the participants of the proceedings, make applications and objections.  Any member of the High Qualifications Commission of Judges of Ukraine, who carried out the proceedings, does not participate in the voting or the decision making.

30.     

Cancel premium for access to the state secret by judges.

п. 72 CDL-AD (2011)033

The Draft Law abolishes the premium for access to the state secret by a judge. The judge will have officio access to such secrets.

The bill grants a premium for access to state secret information provided by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU).

31.     

Cancel provisions of the law that allow judges to receive any prizes, awards or certificates.

п. 40 CDL-AD(2010)026

A judge to be dismissed cannot be awarded any state award, any other award, orders or certificates. A judge can be awarded only for personal courage and heroism in life threatening situations.

A judge to be dismissed cannot be awarded any state award, any other award, orders or certificates. A judge can be awarded only for personal courage and heroism in life threatening situations.

32.     

Include the principle of automatic allocation of cases in the basic principles of judiciary proceedings.

п. 31-32 CPL-AD (2013)014

Automatic allocation of cases was assigned to the regulations of organization of the judiciary. The principle of allocation will be exhaustively defined by the law.

Automatic allocation of cases was assigned to the regulations of organization of the judiciary, yet  the rules of the allocation can be defined on the sub-law level with decrees issued by the Council of Judges of Ukraine.

33.     

 Ensure that decisions of the High Council of Justice regarding management and administration of the justice system, as well as decisions relating to appointment, transfer, promotion, dismissal or disciplinary responsibility should be motivated and reviewed by the court of law. Independence of the High Council of Justice does not mean that it is beyond the scope of law and its decisions cannot be reviewed in court.

п. 39 CCJE (2007) Op. N 10

Decisions of the qualification commission of judges, its working bodies, the Council of Judges of Ukraine and the High Council of Justice are subjected to court review under the Administrative Proceedings Code of Ukraine.

Decisions of the High Qualification Commission of Judges (except for decisions on opening or refusal of initiation of disciplinary proceedings), the Council of Judges of Ukraine and the High Council of Justice are subjected to court review under the Administrative Proceedings Code of Ukraine.

34.     

Take into account a judge’s participation in professional training during consideration of their appointment for service.

п. 70 CCJE (2007) Op. N 10

To be promoted, a judge should submit information about his success in improving his qualifications at the State School of Judges with a view to entering into academic teaching or research etc. These activities will be taken into account during the recruitment competition.

During promotion, qualification class is taken into account. When assigning into qualification class, a judges participation in professional training is not taken into account.

35.     

Ensure the involvement of judges in decisions about management of the courts, the judicial budget and determination of its allocation at local and national levels. Ensure consultations with the judges about plans in relation to any changes to the law ( on the status of judges) and pertaining to their salaries and their social security.

п. 1.8 DAJ/DOC (98) 23

The Council of Judges of Ukraine controls the activities of the State Judicial Administration, gives opinions on draft laws and proposals of other provisions relating to the judiciary, status of judges, judicial proceedings, and will participate in the budget process.

No changes in powers of the Council of Judges of Ukraine are foreseen.

36.     

Ensure that in states where there is a probationary period before a decision on the appointment of judges on a permanent basis, or where the judge is appointed for a limited fixed term that can be renewed, a decision on the refusal to appoint to the position on a permanent basis or non-renewal of appointment may be made only by an independent authority or under its propositions, recommendation or approval of its opinions, 

п. 3.3 DAJ/DOC (98) 23

The Parliament of Ukraine (Verkhovna Rada) elect a judge for an indefinite period or dismisses him from office only on the basis of the recommendations issued by the qualification commission of judges consisting of judges elected by judges.

The Parliament of Ukraine of Ukraine (Verkhovna Rada)  elect a judge indefinitely or dismisses him from office only on the recommendations of the High Qualification Commission of Judges, consisting in the majority of judges elected by judges.

37.     

Grant the High Council of Justice the right to design and change the court network.

п. 129(25) CDL-AD(2010)026

The Council of Judges of Ukraine gives recommendations on the drafts of laws or other legal acts relating to the judiciary. Full inclusion of this recommendation requires changes to the Constitution.

Judicial self-governance bodies are excluded from decision making on changes of the court's network.

38.     

Authorize the Supreme Court to resolve conflicts relating to issues not only of substantive law but also procedural law.

п. 29-34 CDL-AD(2010)026

The Supreme Court of Ukraine will be authorized to review cases also in instances concerning discrepancies in the application of the norms of procedural law.

The Supreme Court of Ukraine will be authorized to review cases also in instances concerning discrepancies in the application of the norms of procedural law.

39.     

Provide the Supreme Court with the opportunity to decide on the admissibility of complaints about unequal application of the law.

п. 29-34 CDL-AD(2010)026

The question of the admission of cases for review is addressed by the Supreme Court of Ukraine.

The question of the admission of cases for review is addressed by the Supreme Court of Ukraine.

40.     

Empower the Supreme Court to rule on conflicts between the three jurisdictions (civil and criminal, commercial and administrative).

п. 29-34 CDL-AD(2010)026

The Supreme Court of Ukraine will review previous  decisions in cases of problematic definition of competent jurisdiction.

The Supreme Court will decide on conflicts between jurisdictions only when viewing cases as a court of last resort.

41.     

 Grant the parties equal access to the Supreme Court in cases of violation by Ukraine of international legal obligations.

п. 29-34 CDL-AD(2010)026

Questions relating to the admission of cases are addressed by the Supreme Court of Ukraine.

Questions relating to the admission of cases for review are addressed by the Supreme Court of Ukraine.

42.     

Allow judges the opportunity to participate in all decisions regarding the implementation and development of information technologies in the judiciary.

п. F (V) CCJE(2011)2

The Unified Judicial Information System will be established by the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine with the consent or on the initiative of the Council of Judges of Ukraine.

The relevant provision is absent.

43.     

To ensure the publication of "dissenting opinions" judges with the verdict. This can contribute improving the content of the verdict, and help with understanding the verdict and the evolution of the law.

п. 51 CCJE(2008)5

The Unified State Register of Court Decisions contains dissenting opinions of judges as well.

The relevant provision is absent.

44.     

Install adequate procedural deadlines in civil, criminal and administrative cases.

п.11 CCJE(2013)4

The Draft Law proposes to increase the timeframe for appeal against verdicts.

The relevant provision is absent.

Цікаве