Ukraine: improvement of courts despite problems with parliamentary majority

On 16 September, the ultimate Council of Ukraine adopted a law establishing the peculiar territory Administrative Court (SOAS) and the peculiar Appeal Administrative Court (SAAS). The task was supported by 239 deputies (193 from the presidential Service of the Nation, 10 from Holos, 14 from Dovira, 9 from the faction Za Majbutnie, 8 non-fractional, 5 from the Platform for Life and Peace and 1 from the Renewal of Ukraine). No associate has voted against the bill, but 37 have abstained from the vote and 40 have not taken part.

The powers of both courts were defined in February of this year, and the vote afraid the final appointment of them. SOAS is to deal with complaints about acts issued by central authorities, specified as the Cabinet of Ministers. It will besides deal with the registration of political parties, the prohibition of the activities of groups and appeals against the decisions of the competition committees regarding the appointment of heads of service (including the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption and the National Anti-corruption Office of Ukraine – NABU). SAAS, on the another hand, is to be a second instance body for SOAS rulings. On 15 September, the ultimate Judicial Commission of Judges besides approved the composition of the committee to elect judges to fresh courts. It will include 3 global experts and 3 denominations of the Council of Judges of Ukraine.

The planting of fresh bodies with non-corrupt judges may contribute to the improvement of the regulation of law in the State, as they will be tasked with monitoring the legality of acts issued by central authorities. At the same time, the voting results show the expanding problems of the Service of the Nation (SN) with maintaining an informal coalition in parliament. They are mainly due to failed attempts to restrict the independency of anti-corruption institutions in July this year and the related treatment of deputies.

Comment

• The creation of courts is an crucial step towards judicial reform. The fresh bodies will replace the territory Administrative Court of Kiev (OASK), which was liquidated in 2022, whose judges were accused of corruption and of succumbing to political pressure. SOAS and SAAS are of large importance due to the fact that they control the legality of acts issued by the main state authorities. Their creation was foreseen both in Plans for Ukraine (reform programme)included in the EU Instrument for Ukraine), as well as the Extended Fund Facility of the global Monetary Fund. The implementation of the changes to these plans depends on the payment of subsequent tranches of macro-financial assistance from these institutions.
• The success of the improvement depends on the appointment of honest judges by the expert committee. Concern may be raised by the fact that the names of 2 of the 3 members of the committee nominated by the authorities go through the journalistic investigations concerningcorruption. This shows the opposition of the judiciary's environment to changes in its own circles, as well as possibly the willingness of the ruling authorities to establish control of the selection process, which could throw distant the chance for a fresh beginning in administrative justice. It may be helpful to limit the opposition of these groups to the choice of judges: in the case of an equal number of Ukrainian and global experts, the votes of the second (as a consequence of Western partners' pressures) can be decided.
• The modest advantage in voting in favour of the bill reflects the increasing problem of the Servant of the Nation in parliament. In practice, the independent majority of the presidential faction (min. 226 votes out of 450) has been a fiction at least since the beginning of the full-scale war. Since then, the control of the ultimate Council of Ukraine has been ensured by an informal coalition of SN with oligarchy factions (Dowira, Za Majbutnie) and remnants of the illegalized opposition Platform in 2022 – for Life (Platform for Life and Peace and Renewal of Ukraine). SupportThe SN grants any of Holos MEPs, European Solidarity and, occasionally, Batkiwszczyna. The consequence of the vote shows the expanding assertiveness of erstwhile MPs, who are not in open opposition at the moment, but in a large number of deputies who abstained or did not vote: in the case of the Renewal of Ukraine it was 8 (in 9 present), and the Platform for Life and Peace – 9 (in 14 present).
• The informal majority in parliament began to wobble after unsuccessful attempts to limit the independency of anti-corruption bodies (see besides Ukraine: Elimination of the independency of anti-corruption services against affront at the top of powerand Ukraine: ultimate Council restores independency of anti-corruption bodies).Members were annoyed by the force to adopt controversial changes, then attempts by the President's Office to throw work for them and yet to vote to mitigate their effects. In addition, any parliamentarians fear revenge from NABU and the peculiar Anti-corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAP) – protection against prosecution by the services was to be 1 of their conditions for supporting these laws. Conflicts with coalitions may in the future give emergence to difficulties in collecting the majority in votes crucial to the president or require action to be taken that is characterised by political corruption.