{"id":4643,"date":"2019-02-18T16:23:00","date_gmt":"2019-02-18T14:23:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/"},"modified":"2025-07-21T16:22:43","modified_gmt":"2025-07-21T13:22:43","slug":"political-points-for-11-18-february-2019","status":"publish","type":"analytical-materials","link":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/","title":{"rendered":"Political Points for 11-18 February 2019"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_69_1 counter-flat ez-toc-counter ez-toc-transparent ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Sections<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/#Dubious_decisions_by_the_Congress_of_Advocates_may_affect_legitimacy_of_all_personnel-related_decisions_for_the_judiciary\" title=\"Dubious decisions by the Congress of Advocates may affect legitimacy of all personnel-related decisions for the judiciary\">Dubious decisions by the Congress of Advocates may affect legitimacy of all personnel-related decisions for the judiciary<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Dubious_decisions_by_the_Congress_of_Advocates_may_affect_legitimacy_of_all_personnel-related_decisions_for_the_judiciary\"><\/span>Dubious decisions by the Congress of Advocates may affect legitimacy of all personnel-related decisions for the judiciary<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>1. CPLR expert opinion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>On February 15, 2019, the Congress of Advocates of Ukraine took place. The agenda included the election of two members of the High Council of Justice (HCJ) and one member of the High Qualification Commission of Judges (HQCJ), whose term ends in 2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The current HCJ members \u2013 P. Grechkivsky and O. Malovatsky \u2013 decided to participate in the election and, with the support of the delegates at the Congress (161 and 142 votes out of 178, respectively) were\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/unba.org.ua\/news\/4112-zizd-advokativ-obrav-grechkivs-kogo-ta-malovac-kogo-chlenami-vishoi-radi-pravosuddya.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">reelected<\/a>. It is due to the participation of these individuals in the election that a group of Parliament members\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.ccu.gov.ua\/novyna\/do-konstytuciynogo-sudu-ukrayiny-nadiyshlo-konstytuciyne-podannya-48-narodnyh-deputativ-6\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">appealed<\/a>\u00a0to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine regarding the interpretation of the constitutional provision that the same person may not serve as the HCJ member for two terms in a row.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>According to the CPLR experts\u2019 opinion, neither P. Grechkivsky nor O. Malovatsky should have been elected to the HCJ, given the mentioned constitutional limitation. The fact that they were first elected to the former High Council of Justice does not suggest they are not covered by this prohibition, given that the new HCJ was created precisely through reorganization of the former HCJ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In addition, the Congress of Advocates of Ukraine issued a vote of no confidence and\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/ukranews.com\/ua\/news\/614323-z-yizd-advokativ-zvilnyv-chlena-vkks-lutsyuka\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">dismissed<\/a>\u00a0P. Lutsyuk as a member of the HQCJ, as well as\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/vkdka.org\/oleksandra-drozdova-obrano-chlenom-vkks-vid-advokaturi\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">elected<\/a>\u00a0a new member of the Commission \u2013 O. Drozdov, who served as the former head of the High Qualification and Disciplinary Commission of the Bar.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The media versions regarding the grounds for such decision differ. Thus, according to some\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/ukranews.com\/ua\/news\/614323-z-yizd-advokativ-zvilnyv-chlena-vkks-lutsyuka\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">reports<\/a>, the basis for such decision was the fact that \u201cduring his term in the HQCJ, he was prohibited from working as an attorney and participating in the bar community bodies, but he nevertheless participated in the bar conference, which indicates that he illegally combined work as a member of the HQCJ with bar activity\u201d. Instead, according to the Lb.ua\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/lb.ua\/news\/2019\/02\/18\/420005_u_restoran_tilki_pislya.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">report<\/a>, the reason for putting this issue up for vote was\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/ukr.lb.ua\/news\/2018\/07\/31\/404035_chlena_vkksu_lutsyuka_viyavili_pidrobku.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">forgery<\/a>\u00a0of his attorney\u2019s certificate. Reports also mention that judges invited to the Congress expressed their dissatisfaction with P. Lutsyuk\u2019s activities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Based on media reports, it is unclear which of the legal grounds was applied to justify P.&nbsp;Lutsyuk\u2019s dismissal. It seems that no one tried to establish the existence of proper grounds for dismissal, and P. Lutsyuk himself did not participate in the Congress.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>According to the CPLR experts\u2019 opinion, the fact that the subject of P. Lutsyuk\u2019s removal from the Commission was placed on the agenda based on a verbal submission and that P. Lutsyuk himself was not given the opportunity to make an explanation gives reasons to doubt the legitimacy of the Congress of Advocates actions in this situation. In addition, the early termination of P. Lutsyuk\u2019s tenure may partially block the operation of the HQCJ at present, since the issues regarding his dismissal and the ability to perform his functions, such as participating in interviews with candidates to the Supreme Court, remains unsolved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>2. Respective authorities counter-point\/argument<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>As of February 18, 2019, the HCJ and the HQCJ did not respond to these decisions of the Congress of Advocates in any way. However, on February 18, 2019, the previously\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/vkksu.gov.ua\/ua\/practice\/zasidannya-komisii\/poriadok-diennij-zasidannia-komisii-18-liutogo-2019-roku\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">announced<\/a>\u00a0interviews with candidates to the Supreme Court that were supposed to be conducted by the Commission\u2019s panel of which P. Lutsyuk was a member did not take place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>3. CPLR assessment of the authorities counter-point<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The CPLR experts emphasize that the turnover of the HCJ members is an important safeguard of ensuring the independence of this body, as well as a way to prevent the HCJ members from using their authority for their own purposes and from the formation of judicial membership controlled by it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The previous\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/zakon.rada.gov.ua\/laws\/show\/22\/98-%D0%B2%D1%80\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Law<\/a>\u00a0\u201cOn the High Council of Justice\u201d provided that a person may be appointed a member of this body for only one term. The new\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/zakon.rada.gov.ua\/laws\/show\/1798-19\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Law<\/a>\u00a0\u201cOn the High Council of Justice\u201d similarly affirmed that membership in the HCJ for two terms in a row is unacceptable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Given the serious threat to the legitimacy of the HCJ and the HQCJ activity posed by the decisions of the Congress of Advocates, P. Grechkivsky, O. Malovatsky, O. Drozdov and P.&nbsp;Lutsyuk should abstain from participation in the activity of these bodies before legitimacy of these decisions is verified by a court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>4. Related legislation\/instructions which require the authorities act in a certain manner<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>According to sec. 5 of Article 131 of the Constitution of Ukraine, the same person may not serve as the HCJ member for two terms in a row. Sec. 2 of Article 5 of the\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/zakon.rada.gov.ua\/laws\/show\/1798-19#n48\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Law<\/a>\u00a0\u201cOn the High Council of Justice\u201d contains a similar restriction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Law \u201cOn the Judiciary and Status of Judges\u201d sets out an exhaustive list of grounds for dismissal of a member of the HQCJ. The authority that elected the member of the Commission may dismiss him\/her from office only in case of:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>1) identification of circumstances regarding his\/her failure to comply with the law\u2019s requirements;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>2) significant violation of requirements established by the legislation on prevention of corruption;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>3) failure to participate in the Commission\u2019s work during one full calendar month without valid reasons or repeated refusal to vote on issues under consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>5. CPLR expert suggestions on how to fix the problem using the legal instruments available in Ukraine<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The challenging situation that has developed in connection with the personnel decisions by the Congress of Advocates can only be resolved through repealing these decisions by a court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In addition, the events surrounding the Congress of Advocates and its outcomes have, once again, proven the need for reforming the system of advocates self-government and adoption of the draft law No. 9055 \u201cOn the Bar and Advocate Activity\u201d. Previously, the Reanimation Package of Reforms has already\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/rpr.org.ua\/news\/rpr-zaklykaje-uhvalyty-zakonoproekt-pro-advokaturu-ta-advokatsku-diyalnist-9055-u-pershomu-chytanni\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">called<\/a>\u00a0for this back in December 2018.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Dubious decisions by the Congress of Advocates may affect legitimacy of all personnel-related decisions for the judiciary 1. CPLR expert opinion On February 15, 2019, the Congress of Advocates of [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","categories":[70],"authors":[178],"source":[],"analytics":[400],"class_list":["post-4643","analytical-materials","type-analytical-materials","status-publish","hentry","category-judiciary","authors-cplr","analytics-weekly-analytics"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v24.8.1 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Political Points for 11-18 February 2019 - Pravo<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Dubious decisions by the Congress of Advocates may affect legitimacy of all personnel-related decisions for the judiciary.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Political Points for 11-18 February 2019 - Pravo\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Dubious decisions by the Congress of Advocates may affect legitimacy of all personnel-related decisions for the judiciary.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Pravo\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-07-21T13:22:43+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/frame-30.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2400\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1350\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\n\t    \"@context\": \"https:\/\/schema.org\",\n\t    \"@graph\": [\n\t        {\n\t            \"@type\": \"WebPage\",\n\t            \"@id\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/\",\n\t            \"url\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/\",\n\t            \"name\": \"Political Points for 11-18 February 2019 - Pravo\",\n\t            \"isPartOf\": {\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/#website\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"datePublished\": \"2019-02-18T14:23:00+00:00\",\n\t            \"dateModified\": \"2025-07-21T13:22:43+00:00\",\n\t            \"description\": \"Dubious decisions by the Congress of Advocates may affect legitimacy of all personnel-related decisions for the judiciary.\",\n\t            \"breadcrumb\": {\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/#breadcrumb\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"inLanguage\": \"en-US\",\n\t            \"potentialAction\": [\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"ReadAction\",\n\t                    \"target\": [\n\t                        \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/\"\n\t                    ]\n\t                }\n\t            ]\n\t        },\n\t        {\n\t            \"@type\": \"BreadcrumbList\",\n\t            \"@id\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/#breadcrumb\",\n\t            \"itemListElement\": [\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"ListItem\",\n\t                    \"position\": 1,\n\t                    \"name\": \"Home\",\n\t                    \"item\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/\"\n\t                },\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"ListItem\",\n\t                    \"position\": 2,\n\t                    \"name\": \"Policy analysis\",\n\t                    \"item\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/\"\n\t                },\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"ListItem\",\n\t                    \"position\": 3,\n\t                    \"name\": \"Political Points for 11-18 February 2019\"\n\t                }\n\t            ]\n\t        },\n\t        {\n\t            \"@type\": \"WebSite\",\n\t            \"@id\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/#website\",\n\t            \"url\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/\",\n\t            \"name\": \"Pravo\",\n\t            \"description\": \"\",\n\t            \"potentialAction\": [\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"SearchAction\",\n\t                    \"target\": {\n\t                        \"@type\": \"EntryPoint\",\n\t                        \"urlTemplate\": \"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/?s={search_term_string}\"\n\t                    },\n\t                    \"query-input\": {\n\t                        \"@type\": \"PropertyValueSpecification\",\n\t                        \"valueRequired\": true,\n\t                        \"valueName\": \"search_term_string\"\n\t                    }\n\t                }\n\t            ],\n\t            \"inLanguage\": \"en-US\"\n\t        }\n\t    ]\n\t}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Political Points for 11-18 February 2019 - Pravo","description":"Dubious decisions by the Congress of Advocates may affect legitimacy of all personnel-related decisions for the judiciary.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Political Points for 11-18 February 2019 - Pravo","og_description":"Dubious decisions by the Congress of Advocates may affect legitimacy of all personnel-related decisions for the judiciary.","og_url":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/","og_site_name":"Pravo","article_modified_time":"2025-07-21T13:22:43+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2400,"height":1350,"url":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/frame-30.png","type":"image\/png"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/","url":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/","name":"Political Points for 11-18 February 2019 - Pravo","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/#website"},"datePublished":"2019-02-18T14:23:00+00:00","dateModified":"2025-07-21T13:22:43+00:00","description":"Dubious decisions by the Congress of Advocates may affect legitimacy of all personnel-related decisions for the judiciary.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/political-points-for-11-18-february-2019\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Policy analysis","item":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/analytical-materials\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Political Points for 11-18 February 2019"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/","name":"Pravo","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/analytical-materials\/4643"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/analytical-materials"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/analytical-materials"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4643"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4643"},{"taxonomy":"authors","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/authors?post=4643"},{"taxonomy":"source","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/source?post=4643"},{"taxonomy":"analytics","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pravo.org.ua\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/analytics?post=4643"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}