| Ukraine |
This article is part of the series: |
|
|
|
Constitution
Executive
Judiciary
Divisions
Election
Foreign relations
|
|
Other countries · Atlas |
The judicial system of Ukraine is outlined in the 1996 Constitution of Ukraine.[1] Before this there was no notion of judicial review nor any Supreme Court since 1991's Ukrainian independence.[2]
Although judicial independence exist in principle, in practise there is little separation of juridical and political powers. Judges are subjected to pressure by political and business interests.[3] Ukraine's court system is widely regarded as corrupt.[4] A Ukrainian Justice Ministry 2009 survey revealed that only 10 percent of respondents trusted the nation’s court system. Less than 30 percent believed that it’s still possible to get a fair trial.[5] Ukrainian politicians and analyst have described the system of justice in Ukraine as "rotten to the core"[5][6] and have complained about political pressure put on judges and corruption.[7][8][9][10][11][12] Ukrainian judges have been arrested while taking bribe.[13]
Court judges maintained a 99.5 percent conviction rate from 2005 till 2008, equal to the conviction rate of the Soviet Union.[5] Suspects are often incarcerated for long periods before trial.[5]
Contents |
Ukrainian courts enjoy legal, financial and constitutional freedom guaranteed by measures adopted in Ukrainian law in 2010. Although there are still problems with the performance of the system, it is considered to have been much improved since the last juddicial reform introduced in 2002. The Supreme Court is regarded as being an independent and impartial body, and has on several occasions ruled against the Ukrainian government.
The judicial system of Ukraine consists of four levels of courts of general jurisdiction, as follows[14]:
Prosecutors in Ukraine have greater powers then in most European countries. According to the European Commission for Democracy through Law ‘the role and functions of the Prosecutor’s Office is not in accordance with Council of Europe standards".[15]
Beside everything above-mentioned there also is the Supreme Council of Justice which was legalized on January 15, 1998.[16] This council "is a collective independent body that is responsible for formation of the high-profile judge corpus capable of qualified, honest and impartial exercise of justice on a professional basis; and for making decisions regarding violations by judges and procurators of the requirements concerning their incompatibility and within the scope of their competence of their disciplinary responsibility". Three members of the council are automatically assigned for holding the following positions: Chairman of the Supreme Court, Minister of Justice, and Prosecutor General. The other 17 members are elected for a period of six years. The council consists of 20 members.
Ukraine has few relevant corporate and property laws; this hinders corporate governance.[17] Ukrainian companies often use international law to settle conflicts.[1] Ukraine recognizes the verdicts of the European Court of Human Rights.[1]
Judges are appointed by presidential decree for a period of five years, after which Ukraine's Supreme Council confirms them for life in an attempt to insulate them from politics. Judges are protected from dismissal (save in instances of gross misconduct).
Since January 1, 2010 it is allowed to hold court proceedings in Russian on mutual consent of parties. Citizens, who are unable to talk Ukrainian or Russian are allowed to use their native language or the services of a translator.[18]
Ukraine's judicial system was inherited from that of the Soviet Union and the former Ukrainian SSR. As such, it had many of the problems which marred Soviet justice, most notably a corrupt and politicised judiciary. Lawyers have stated trial results can be unfairly fixed, with judges commonly refusing to hear exculpatory evidence, while calling frequent recesses to confer privately with the prosecutor. Insiders say paying and receiving bribes is a common practice in most Ukrainian courts. Fee amounts depend on jurisdiction, the crime, real or trumped-up, and the financial wherewithal of the individual or company involved.[5][6]
The Prosecutor-General's Office - part of the government - exerted undue influence, with judges often not daring to rule against state prosecutors. Those who did faced disciplinary actions; when a Kiev court ruled for opposition politician Yulia Tymoshenko, the presiding judge was himself prosecuted. The courts were not even independent from each other, and it was commonplace for trial court judges to call the higher courts and ask how to decide a case. Courts were often underfunded, with little money or resources. It was not uncommon for cases to be heard in small, cramped courtrooms with the electricity cut off while prisoners were unable to attend because of lack of transport from jails to courtrooms.
Reformers highlighted the state of the judiciary as a key problem in the early 1990s and established a number of programmes to improve the performance of the judiciary. A Ukraine-Ohio Rule of Law Program was established in 1994 which brought together lawyers and judges from the American state of Ohio, including members of the Ohio Supreme Court, with their Ukrainian counterparts. The United States Agency for International Development supported these and other initiatives, which were also backed by European governments and international organisations.
These efforts proved controversial among some of the judicial old guard, but a band of reformist judges - dubbed the "judicial opposition" - increasingly gained support from reformers in local administrations who pushed for an end to judicial corruption. Judges were indicted en masse in Dnipropetrovsk in the early 1990s, and later on judges from the Mykolayiv city court and the Moskovskyy district court of Kiev were put on trial for corruption.
Major changes were made to the judicial system when the law "On the court system" was passed on 7 February 2002, creating a new level of judiciary and enacting institutional safeguards to insulate judges from political pressure.
President Viktor Yanukovych formed an expert group to make recommendations how to "clean up the current mess and adopt a law on court organization” on March 24, 2010.[5] One day after setting this commission Yanukovych stated “We can no longer disgrace our country with such a court system.”[5]
In December 2011 certain economic crimes where decriminalized.[19][20]
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||