There is an ongoing competition in Ukraine for 78 vacant posts in the Supreme Court. According to the results of…
CHESNO. Filter the Judiciary! launched the database of the judges’ profiles
The CHESNO movement, within the CHESNO. Filter the Judiciary! Campaign, has launched the unique database of the profiles of Ukrainian judges. The profiles contain information available from open sources which is related to the career, questionable court decisions, real estate, family ties, engagement in corruption cases, and other data that make it possible to draw the conclusions about integrity of the judge. Judges who violate at least one integrity criterion are considered to be dishonest and featured in profiles with black garlic.
In the first place, the CHESNO Movement analysed first-instance judges of Kyiv city, judges of the new Supreme Court, and is gradually filling the profiles base with data about the “servants of Themis” working in the regions. The database also includes profiles of appellate courts’ judges undergoing a qualification assessment by High Judicial Qualifications Commission of Ukraine in November.
At the moment, the database contains information on more than 500 judges. CHESNO plans to create a profile of every working judge of the country. In the near future, CHESNO. Filter the Judiciary! will analyse the profiles of judges of the Kyiv region and appellate courts’ judges in the regions of Ukraine.
The CHESNO movement collects information according to its own methodology from publicly available sources and does not allege that a person has committed an offence or is guilty of it. Conclusions made by CHESHO as to the judges’ dishonest practices are value judgments which may not correspond to the official decisions and conclusions of the government authorities. The Supreme Court’s judges were also analysed according to the general methodology used by CHESNO.Filter the Judiciary! for creating the profiles; the conclusions as to their lack of integrity were made on the basis of this methodology. Thus, not only the judges who received a negative opinion from the Public Integrity Council were found to be unscrupulous.
The database is available here.