ESR
3.3.4.3. The legislation has made it impossible for other courts of first instance and appellate courts to examine cases falling under the substantive jurisdiction of the High Anticorruption Court
Problem solving:
3.3.4. The overall progress of court hearings involving corruption and corruption-related criminal offenses is slow. There is no established practice of consideration of criminal proceedings in this category. There are numerous cases of abuse of procedural rights by litigants
Deadlines for all measures within ESR
-
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) clearly and unambiguously stipulates that the Appeals Chamber of the High Anticorruption Court shall review court decisions of the courts of first instance under the appellate procedure in all criminal proceedings falling under the substantive jurisdiction of the High Anticorruption Court (30 percent); b) stipulates that only the High Anticorruption Court shall decide the matters involving the enforcement of verdicts handed down by the High Anticorruption Court (35 percent). |
65% |
| 2 |
at least 80 percent of experts on the formulation and implementation of the legal policy point out that: a) the legislation has made it impossible for other courts of first instance and appellate courts to examine cases falling under the substantive jurisdiction of the High Anticorruption Court (10 percent); b) there have been no cases where other courts have examined proceedings falling under the substantive jurisdiction of the High Anticorruption Court (25 percent). |
35% |