Those who were supposed to check the integrity of judges themselves came under suspicion: the Temporary Special Commission interrogated DEJURE head Zhernakov

During yesterday's meeting of the Verkhovna Rada's Provisional Investigative Commission, parliamentarians questioned Mykhailo Zhernakov, head of the DEJURE foundation. Interest in the meeting was heightened by public statements from several former members of the Public Integrity Council (PIC), who claim that Zhernakov and related structures may have influenced the formation of the PIC's composition, and also used donor funds non-transparently. Zhernakov himself denies these accusations, but also avoids explanations, reports UNN.

The meeting of the PIC was accompanied by lively discussions, heightened emotions, and a series of mutual accusations.

Former members of the PIC stated that there allegedly existed pre-formed lists of candidates for the new composition of the PIC, and that the head of the DEJURE foundation could have had a direct influence on the process of selecting Council members. In addition, it was reported that the financing of the PIC's activities was non-transparent, and that part of the grant funds could have been used with violations.

These claims led to Zhernakov being summoned for questioning by the parliamentary PIC. He only arrived on the second attempt, after the police visited him for a forced appearance.

Former judge Inna Otrosh considers Zhernakov's behavior "manipulative" and noted that instead of direct answers, he resorted to emotional statements and counterattacks.

Zhernakov insisted that the commission allegedly had no mandate to question him, as the DEJURE foundation is not funded by the state budget and is an independent public organization. The PIC responded that they are investigating the issue of influence on the formation of the PIC, which is a direct element of the judicial infrastructure, as it assesses the integrity of judges and is effectively a filter.

MP Maksym Buzhanskyi drew attention to the fact that Zhernakov, as a sole proprietor, received payments from the foundation he heads. When asked if he paid funds "to himself," Zhernakov replied that he did not remember, but believes that any work should be paid for.

He also confirmed that individual members of the PIC received funding from the foundation "for well-performed work." According to Buzhanskyi, Zhernakov controls 13 out of 19 members in the PIC, which is an absolute majority.

Parliamentarians were interested in what specific activities these payments were made for and whether this creates risks of a conflict of interest, as PIC members are subject to the Law "On Preventing Corruption."

Experts note that the Public Integrity Council is not just a public organization, but a legally defined element of the judicial selection system that influences candidates' assessment. According to legislation, PIC members are subject to anti-corruption requirements, including regarding the receipt of remuneration and the prevention of conflicts of interest. Accordingly, if an organization headed by a current or former PIC member finances other Council members, this requires a separate assessment by law enforcement agencies.

Representatives of European embassies and donors supporting DEJURE foundation projects were invited to the meeting. Observers suggest that the statements heard at the meeting may raise additional questions for them regarding the practices of fund management and the organization's activities.

Maksym Buzhanskyi summarized Zhernakov's speech as controversial and stated that the answers received only increased the number of questions regarding the transparency of financial operations.

At the same time, he ironically noted that judges should apply the logic voiced by Zhernakov in their own assessment.

The PIC continues to investigate the stated circumstances. The commission has not announced interim conclusions, but individual deputies emphasize that the issue of possible influence of public organizations on judicial selection bodies should be considered comprehensively.

For now, the interrogation has become just one episode in a broader discussion about the transparency of the public sector's work, the role of donors, and integrity standards in judicial and law enforcement reforms. At the same time, it is emphasized that, firstly, integrity as a criterion must be clearly defined, and secondly, those who check integrity must themselves meet such criteria, which, in fact, is doubtful.

Recall

Earlier, the PIC questioned former members of the PIC who published an article about the alleged manual formation of the Integrity Council by DEJURE head Mykhailo Zhernakov.