ESR
2.1.3.1. The disciplinary body in the justice system, formed on the basis of a competitive selection process held by an independent committee, promptly and fairly considers disciplinary cases against judges
Problem solving:
2.1.3. Lack of effective mechanisms for maintaining the integrity of the judiciary and responding to established facts of influence, pressure on judges and interference in their activities
Deadlines for all measures within ESR
01.01.2025 -
31.07.2025
Implementation of SACP measures within ESR
Total number of measures –
1
1
Not started
Implementation of SACP measures within the scope of the Problem by main main performers
National Agency on Corruption Prevention
0%
1
Summarized general information on Measures
Indicators of achievement of ESR
Total number of indicators – 2
Indicators fully achieved – 0
Partially achieved indicators – 0
Indicators with a score of 0% – 2
Summarized general information about Achievement Indicators
| № | Indicators | Weight (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 |
A law has taken effect, which: a) provides for the right to appeal with the High Council of Justice the decisions of the Disciplinary Chamber without obtaining the permission of the Disciplinary Chamber for such an appeal (18 percent); b) defines substantiated and balanced requirements for candidates for positions at the secretariat of the High Council of Justice, which would make it possible to ensure the conformity of the candidates to the criteria of competency, integrity, and professional ethics (18 percent); c) defines the procedure for participation by the Public Council on Integrity in the review of disciplinary complaints, particularly those concerning unscrupulous conduct by a judge, any conduct by a judge that tarnishes the status of a judge or undermines the authority of justice, abuse of the status of a judge to unjust enrichment by the judge or third parties, or declaration of knowingly false (including incomplete) statements in the declaration of integrity of the judge (17 percent); d) defines the procedure for reviewing disciplinary complaints that—at the time of entry into force by the Law of Ukraine dated July 14, 2021, No. 1635-IX On Amendments to Select Legislative Acts of Ukraine Pertaining to the Procedure of Election (Appointment) to Positions of Members of the High Council of Justice and the Activities of Disciplinary Inspectors of the High Council of Justice and until the creation of the service of disciplinary inspectors—were being reviewed by members of the High Council of Justice, as well as cases the review of which had been commenced by Disciplinary Chambers of the High Council of Justice, complaints against decisions to bring a judge or prosecutor to administrative liability which were being examined by the High Council of Justice prior to the aforementioned period (17 percent) |
70% |
| 2 |
at least 80 percent of justice experts estimate that: a) the legislatively prescribed powers of disciplinary chambers of the High Council of Justice enable the body to be effective in practice fully or for the most part (8 percent); b) the disciplinary chambers of the High Council of Justice are operating without undue external interference and in an impartial manner (8 percent); c) the disciplinary chambers of the High Council of Justice ensure a fair examination of disciplinary complaints against judges and fairly exercise their disciplinary powers with respect to judges (7 percent); d) the disciplinary chambers of the High Council of Justice ensure prompt examination of disciplinary complaints against judges and promptly exercise their disciplinary powers with respect to judges (7 percent). |
30% |