Problem

Despite the legal restriction prohibiting one person from holding an administrative position in a court for two consecutive terms, in practice there are cases of complete disregard of this rule by judges. This necessitates the introduction of other approaches to identifying judges who hold administrative positions to eliminate such situations.
Although the legislation contains provisions on the widespread use of modern information technologies in the administration of justice, they have not yet been implemented in practice, in particular due to the partial implementation of the Unified Judicial Information and Telecommunication System. Without prejudice to the rights and legitimate interests of the parties to the proceedings, the courts could consider a number of cases electronically, regardless of the location of the court and the parties, which would also reduce corruption risks and optimize the workload of judges.
Alternative dispute resolution methods are gradually being introduced: legislation on mediation has come into force, and a draft law on improving the operation of arbitration courts is being considered by the Parliament of Ukraine.
The enforcement of court decisions is not effective enough, in particular due to the limited ability of private enforcement officers to enforce court decisions, as well as unjustified moratoriums on enforcement of decisions where the debtors are state-owned enterprises. Legislation should be amended to ensure effective enforcement of international arbitral awards in Ukraine.
Given the limited financial resources available in the public sector of Ukraine, in particular for the judiciary, there is a need to find ways to use the limited resources more efficiently. After the adoption of the Law of Ukraine dated June 2, 2016 No. 1401-VIII On Amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine (Regarding Justice), the network of local courts was not systematically revised, which is important for ensuring access to justice and efficient use of limited resources.