Cases of Violation of Guarantees of Independence of Judges by Law Enforcement Agencies and Individuals

2024;
: 19-28

Citation APA:  Hdanskyi N. (2024).Cases of Violation of Guarantees of Independence of Judges by Law Enforcement Agencies and Individuals. Bulletin of Lviv Polytechnic National University. Series: Legal Sciences. Vol. 11, No. 2(42), Pp. 19-28. URL: https://doi.org/10.23939/law2024.42.019

Authors:
1
Western Ukrainian National University, Teacher of the Criminal Law and Procedure Department

The European Charter on the Statute for Judges establishes the «right to appeal» for every judge if he/she believes that there is a threat to his/her independence or the independence of the legal process, or if this independence is somehow violated, and in such a case, he/she can refer the matter to an independent body. This means that judges are not left defenseless in cases of encroachments on their independence. The right to appeal is a necessary guarantee, otherwise, it would remain merely a desire to establish principles aimed at protecting judges if they are not consistently supported by mechanisms that will ensure their effective implementation. The obligation to obtain a proposal or opinion from an independent body before a decision is made regarding the status of a particular judge does not necessarily extend to all possible situations in which his or her independence might be influenced. That is why it is extremely important to ensure that judges have the opportunity to turn to this body on their own initiative.

In 2022, the High Council of Justice received 128 reports of interference in the professional activities of judges regarding the administration of justice, actions that violate the guarantees of judges' independence, or undermine the authority of justice. In particular, 114 reports were received from judges of local courts, 7 from judges of appellate courts, 3 from judges of the Supreme Court and the High Anti-Corruption Court, and 1 report from the Territorial Department of the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine. The largest number of reports from judges about interference in the activity of judges regarding the administration of justice was received in February 2022 (34 reports), and the least in March 2022 (3 reports).

Judges primarily associated the interference in their activities as judges in the administration of justice with the judicial cases they were handling. The most common reasons for reporting interference in the judges' administration of justice in 2022 were extrajudicial appeals to law enforcement agencies with complaints about judges committing criminal offenses and initiating criminal proceedings against judges - 18 cases; unfounded recusals - 15 cases; improper conduct (baseless accusations against a judge, threats, instructions on procedural actions and making certain judicial decisions, threats of filing complaints about criminal offenses) - 15 cases, among others.

It's important to note that the High Council of Justice is aware of cases where «interference» was associated with the inactivity of law enforcement officials. The High Council of Justice believes that the inactivity of law enforcement representatives poses a direct threat to the independence of judges and the authority of justice. In light of this, the High Council of Justice submits appropriate proposals for the identification and accountability of such individuals in accordance with current legislation.

Academic articles emphasize that «interference» can manifest as threats and as extrajudicial appeals by law enforcement officials. However, the High Council of Justice does not consider threats to file disciplinary complaints against a judge's behavior as «interference». The majority of the High Council of Justice's decisions on taking measures to ensure the independence of judges and the authority of justice in 2020 were mainly related to: judges' security; threats of physical harm; attacks on judges; violations of order in court sessions; blockages of courts.

According to the High Council of Justice's annual report for 2020 «On the State of Ensuring the Independence of Judges in Ukraine,» the highest number of reports from judges about interference in their activity in 2020 related to interference by citizens and their associations. The
High Council of Justice considers this situation to be traditional, as confirmed by statistical data from previous years.

  1. Rishennia Vyshchoi rady pravosuddia «Pro vzhyttia zakhodiv shchodo zabezpechennia nezalezhnosti suddiv ta avtorytetu pravosuddia za povidomlenniam suddiv Kasatsiinoho hospodarskoho sudu u skladi Verkhovnoho Sudu Slucha O.V., Volkovytskoi N.O., Mishchenka I.S.» [Decision of the High Council of Justice «On Taking Measures to Ensure Independence of Judges and Authority of Justice Upon Report of Judges of the Commercial Court of Cassation within the Supreme Court Sluch O.V., Volkovytska N.O., Mishchenko I.S.»] vid 20 serpnia 2020 roku № 2443/0/15-20. URL: https://hcj.gov.ua/doc/doc/3062 [in Ukrainian].
  2. Shchorichna dopovid za 2020 rik «Pro stan zabezpechennia nezalezhnosti suddiv v Ukraini» [Annual report for 2020 «On the state of judicial independence in Ukraine»]. URL: https://hcj.gov.ua/sites/default/files/field/file/shchorichna_dopovid_za... [in Ukrainian];
  3. Rishennia Vyshchoi rada pravosuddia «Pro vzhyttia zakhodiv shchodo zabezpechennia nezalezhnosti suddiv ta avtorytetu pravosuddia za povidomlenniam suddi Monastyryshchenskoho raionnoho sudu Cherkaskoi oblasti Mazai N.V.» [Decision of the High Council of Justice «On taking measures to ensure the independence of judges and the authority of justice upon the report of judge N. Mazai of the Monastyryshche District Court of Cherkasy region] vid 27 zhovtnia 2021 roku № 2944/0/15-20. URL: https://hcj.gov.ua/doc/doc/4591 [in Ukrainian].
  4. Blazhivskyi Ye. M. (2010). Kryminalna vidpovidalnist za vtruchannia v diialnist za kryminalnym pravom Ukrainy [Criminal liability for interference with activities under the criminal law of Ukraine] : avtoref. dys. … kand. yuryd. nauk: 12.00.08 – kryminalne pravo ta kryminolohiia; kryminalno-vykonavche pravo. Lviv: Lvivskyi derzhavnyi universytet vnutrishnikh sprav, 2010. Р. 9 [in Ukrainian].
  5. Shchorichna dopovid za 2022 rik «Pro stan zabezpechennia nezalezhnosti suddiv v Ukraini». [Annual report for 2022 «On the state of judicial independence in Ukraine»]. URL: https://hcj.gov.ua/sites/default/files/field/file/shchorichna_dopovid_za... [in Ukrainian].
  6. Rishennia Vyshchoi rady pravosuddia «Pro vzhyttia zakhodiv shchodo zabezpechennia nezalezhnosti suddiv ta avtorytetu pravosuddia za povidomlenniam holovy Saksahanskoho raionnoho sudu mista Kryvoho Rohu Dnipropetrovskoi oblasti Tkachenka A.V.» [Decision of the High Council of Justice «On Taking Measures to Ensure Independence of Judges and Authority of Justice According to the Report of the Head of Saksahansk District Court of Kryvyi Rih, Dnipro Region, A. Tkachenko»] vid 15 veresnia 2021 roku № 2624/0/15-20 URL: https://hcj.gov.ua/doc/doc/3549 [in Ukrainian]; Shchorichna dopovid za 2021 rik «Pro stan zabezpechennia nezalezhnosti suddiv v Ukraini» [Annual report for 2021 «On the state of judicial independence in Ukraine»]. URL: https://hcj.gov.ua/sites/default/files/field/file/shchorichna_dopovid_za... [in Ukrainian].
  7.  Rishennia Vyshchoi rady pravosuddia «Pro vzhyttia zakhodiv shchodo zabezpechennia nezalezhnosti suddiv ta avtorytetu pravosuddia za povidomlenniam suddi Khersonskoho miskoho sudu Khersonskoi oblasti Kuzminoi O.I.» [Decision of the High Council of Justice «On Taking Measures to Ensure Independence of Judges and Authority of Justice on the Report of Judge of Kherson City Court of Kherson Region O. Kuzmina»] vid 20 zhovtnia 2021 roku № 2866/0/15-20. URL: https://hcj.gov.ua/doc/doc/2823 [in Ukrainian].
  8. Shchorichna dopovid za 2020 rik «Pro stan zabezpechennia nezalezhnosti suddiv v Ukraini» [Annual report for 2020 «On the state of judicial independence in Ukraine»]. URL: https://hcj.gov.ua/sites/default/files/field/file/shchorichna_dopovid_za... hnosti_suddiv_v_ukrayini.pdf [in Ukrainian].
  9. Shchorichna dopovid za 2018 rik «Pro stan zabezpechennia nezalezhnosti suddiv v Ukraini» [Annual report for 2018 «On the state of judicial independence in Ukraine»]. URL: https://hcj.gov.ua/sites/default/files/field/file/shchorichna_ dopovid_za_2018_rik.pdf [in Ukrainian].
  10. Rishennia Vyshchoi rady pravosuddia «Pro nadannia konsultatyvnoho vysnovku shchodo zakonoproiektu № 3291» [Decision of the High Council of Justice «On Providing an Advisory Opinion on Draft Law No. 3291»] vid 27 zhovtnia 2021 roku № 2960/0/15-20. URL: https://hcj.gov.ua/doc/doc/416 [in Ukrainian].
  11. Konventsiia pro zakhyst prav liudyny i osnovopolozhnykh svobod [The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms] vid 04.11.1950 r. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_004#Text [in Ukrainian].
  12. Shchorichna dopovid za 2021 rik «Pro stan zabezpechennia nezalezhnosti suddiv v Ukraini» [Annual report for 2021 «On the state of judicial independence in Ukraine»]. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_004#Text [in Ukrainian].
  13. Rishennia Yevropeiskoho sudu z prav liudyny u spravi «Vierientsov proty Ukrainy» [Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Verentsov v. Ukraine] vid 11 kvitnia 2013 roku (punkty 55, 95) URL: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-118393%22]} [in Ukrainian] ; Shchorichna dopovid za 2021 rik «Pro stan zabezpechennia nezalezhnosti suddiv v Ukraini» [Annual report for 2021 «On the state of judicial independence in Ukraine»]. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_004#Text [in Ukrainian].