Today, on January 17, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court examined the complaint of the judge-accuser Larysa Golnyk on…
Statement by the PIC-founding NGOs on the judges’ evaluation process
Organizations that have formed the Public Integrity Council (PIC) support its demands regarding the need to change the process of evaluation qualification for judges.
We believe that PIC will only return to the judiciary evaluation process in case where the High Qualifications Commission of Judges implement the following proposals:
- to stop the evaluation qualification process until all disputable issues are resolved;
- to repeal part 2, paragraph 46 of the Regulation on the procedure and methodology of qualification evaluation, which will make it impossible to dismiss the anti-Maidan judges;
- to cancel the changes to the Regulation of the High Qualifications Commission of Judges regarding the requirements for the conclusions and information provided by the Public Integrity Council;
- to dismiss or otherwise resolve conflicts of interest among members of the High Qualifications Commission of Judges during the evaluation of judges;
- to ensure timely disclosure of judges’ records, including motivated decisions based on the results of the conclusions and information provided by PIC, and to envisage in the regulations of the Commission mandatory publication of the score of a judge (candidate) received from each member of the Commission according to each of the indicators under the qualification evaluation criteria, as well as the results of the voting by members of the High Qualifications Commission of Judges on the conclusions by PIC;
- Together with PIC, establish common integrity criteria and rules of interaction and communication. Specifically, provision should be made for the Commission to provide PIC with a precise list of judges to be evaluated and the schedule in advance, but not later than 30 days prior to the interview, and not to interview the judge until a notification of the evaluation results is made by the PIC.
In our opinion, only full implementation of all these proposals will allow for transparency and efficiency of the judges’ evaluation process.
We call on the judicial authorities to cooperate with civil society and look forward to a constructive dialogue to continue moving towards openness and transparency.
NGO “All-Ukrainian Association AutoMaidan”
NGO “Centre UA”
NGO “Public Lustration Committee”
NGO “Transparency International Ukraine”
Centre of Policy and Legal Reform
NGO “All-Ukrainian Civil Platform New Country”
Sumy Regional Youth NGO “European Dimension”
NGO “Centre for Democracy and Rule of Law”