Lawyer: Ukraine can use the experience of France, where all judges were dismissed, to reform and clean up the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court needs to be cleansed and reformed, following the example of France after World War II, when all judges were dismissed. This opinion was expressed in an exclusive commentary to UNN by Oleksiy Lyaskovets, a lawyer who is currently at the front.

Details

The Supreme Court has recently been involved in several serious scandals. In particular, the Kyiv District Administrative Court reinstated Bohdan Lviv, a judge of the Supreme Court who has Russian citizenship, as a Supreme Court judge. In addition, former Supreme Court Chief Justice Vsevolod Kniazev was caught on a $2.7 million bribe earlier. His case also involves other Supreme Court judges. The media also reported on another possible corruption crime by Supreme Court judges. In particular, it is alleged that Hryhoriy Mamka, an MP from the Opposition Platform - For Life party, may have helped Oleksandr Shepelev, a former MP accused of a series of contract killings and a state councilor, to get the right decision in the Supreme Court in one of his cases. 

"I completely agree with you, it is necessary (to reform the Supreme Court - ed.) and it is time," Lskovets said, commenting on the question of whether it is necessary to reform the Supreme Court and clean it up  given the scandals and media reports that Mamka could have helped Shepelev get the decision he wanted in the Supreme Court. 

He also noted that the information in the media that Shepelev could have paid for the Supreme Court ruling he wanted should be checked by law enforcement. "This information should be studied and verified by law enforcement," noted Lyaskovets.

According to him, positions in the Supreme Court should be held by people who already have a judicial career, including those who have worked in lower courts, as well as people from outside. However, according to him, there is still a risk that new Supreme Court judges could be influenced.

"We have an ambiguous court practice, a practice that changes, a practice that is adapted. If you take people from the system, where is the guarantee that these people are not connected and are more principled. So to be honest, I don't know what the mechanism should be. It is clear that they need to be changed, but we need to think about how to do it right. It is very difficult. Look even at the HQCJ (High Qualification Commission of Judges - ed.) - it hasn't been elected yet, and we already have a flurry of Kremlin agents, with or without passports..." noted Lyaskovets.

As an example, he cited the dismissal of all judges in France after World War II, when the system was cleansed of clans and dynasties.

"We need to do something similar here. Look at those who have worked in our judicial system - they have higher incomes than those who have worked in business. And here's another issue: look at how many people applied for the competition for first instance judges, and it's very strange that there are a large number of men. That is, there is no one to defend the country, but there is a queue to adapt and rip off the state. And this is a shame," added Lyaskovets.

Add 

Kateryna Butko, head of the public council at the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption (NAPC), believes that the Supreme Court needs to be reformed and cleared of dishonest judges, so that cases like Shepelev's will be considered transparently and efficiently. 

Lawyer and executive director of the Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union Oleksandr Pavlichenko told UNN that the High Council of Justice is tasked with forming an independent judicial system in Ukraine without political influence. 

Volodymyr Vatras, chairman of the subcommittee on the organization and activities of the Bar, legal aid bodies of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Legal Policy, also stated the need to cleanse the Supreme Court of judges who have compromised themselves . 

Recall 

A panel of the Supreme Court changed Shepelev's sentence in the escape from custody case and tried to release him. Judges Vyacheslav Marynych, Volodymyr Korol and Alla Makarovets decided to close one of the episodes of the case, which concerned bribery, due to what they considered insufficient evidence. As a result, the property of the former MP will not be confiscated under this episode . Although, according to experts interviewed by UNN, the Supreme Court judges did not have the right to directly examine any evidence.

In addition, the judges counted the period of Shepelev's stay in the Russian pre-trial detention center as part of the sentence. He was detained in Russia following an extradition request from Ukraine. A year later, Russia refused to extradite the fugitive ex-MP to Ukraine, citing threats to its own national security. It turned outthat Shepelev was valuable to Russia because he was an agent of the FSB and the GRU. 

The Supreme Court panel also used the Savchenko law and counted Shepeleva's stay in the pre-trial detention center on charges in other cases as part of his sentence. 

The prosecutor appealed the actions of the Supreme Court judges to the HCJ.  

According to the automatic distribution , the complaint in Shepelev's case will be considered by the first ever HCJ member judge who fought at the front against Russia, Olena Kovbiy.