Focus area:
Project donor organization:
USAID, Chemonics Int.
Project start:
04.2018
Project completion:
04.2019
Monitoring of decisions to bring judges to disciplinary responsibility
The objective of the project was an independent expert assessment of the practice and decisions of Ukraine’s disciplinary bodies, including:
- Decisions of the Disciplinary Chambers of the High Council of Justice (HCJ), which conduct preliminary reviews of disciplinary complaints, investigate instances of improper judicial conduct, and consider disciplinary cases concerning judges;
- Decisions of the HCJ regarding complaints against the decisions of the Disciplinary Chambers, as well as decisions on the dismissal of judges from office upon the recommendation of these chambers;
- Decisions of the High Administrative Court, the Administrative Cassation Court within the Supreme Court, and the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court concerning the review of parties’ complaints in disciplinary cases against HCJ decisions.
The subject of the study was the decisions on bringing judges to disciplinary liability, adopted by disciplinary bodies in the period from 2017 to June 2018. The study included an analysis of all decisions of disciplinary bodies on the merits (on bringing or refusing to bring judges to disciplinary liability). Decisions on refusing to open a disciplinary case, on opening a disciplinary case, as well as decisions on leaving an application or disciplinary complaint without consideration were evaluated selectively. In total, 442 decisions were studied within the framework of the study.
Additionally, in order to fully and objectively analyze the procedures, the following were conducted:
- “post factum” observation of the sessions of the Supreme Judicial Council and Disciplinary Chambers regarding the consideration of disciplinary proceedings against judges. The object of observation was video recordings of the Supreme Judicial Council sessions for the period 2017 - the first half of 2018;
– in-depth interviews with judges, as well as with members of the Supreme Judicial Council and inspectors of the Supreme Judicial Council Inspectorate.
Based on the results of the analysis, an analytical report “Disciplinary Liability of Judges: Practice of the High Council of Justice in 2017–2018” was prepared, which was presented to all bodies of judicial governance and self-government (VRP, HQCJ, RSU) and provided for review to judges of the Supreme Court.
1. Which bodies make decisions on the disciplinary liability of judges?
Decisions are made by the Disciplinary Chambers of the High Council of Justice, the High Council of Justice itself when considering complaints, as well as by the courts – the Higher Administrative Court (at that time), the Administrative Court of Cassation, and the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court.
2. What types of decisions were included in the monitoring?
The monitoring included all substantive decisions – on bringing judges to disciplinary liability or refusing to bring them to disciplinary liability. Other procedural decisions were analyzed selectively.
3. Over what period was the analysis of disciplinary decisions carried out?
The analysis covered the period from 2017 to June 2018.
4. What was the purpose of the study of the disciplinary practice of judges?
The goal was to provide an independent expert assessment of disciplinary procedures and decisions, to identify their features, problems, and compliance with the standards of due justice.