“Raise your hands, please. In your countries there are anti-corruption court? suggested today, 15 September, President Petro Poroshenko, Prime Ministers, ambassadors and diplomats of EU countries at an international YES forum. Raise up who have. Maybe in France? Maybe in Poland? In Sweden, Germany? Maybe in the United States have? No hands. Anti-corruption court exists only… in Kenya, Uganda, Malaysia, Croatia… I hope that we can create an anti-corruption chamber in the next month… to be Honest, I don’t have another year or two to wait, while will created anti-corruption court.”
Ukrainian yet on the performance Poroshenko responded sharply: European countries do not need a special anti-corruption courts since they have the whole judicial system works like a clock and credible. Unlike Ukraine, where the level of corruption in the higher echelons of power rolls and anti-corruption investigations for years in the courts without consideration.
Poroshenko attempt to manipulate the theme of the fight against corruption has not gone unnoticed and have an international audience. “I want to answer that we have every court – anti-corruption. And spectacular now investigating the case against the President,” he recalled, speaking at a forum after Poroshenko, former U.S. Secretary of state John Kerry. And added that for Ukraine the issue of corruption – a key for further development. The conference hall has met these words an applause.
But judging by the message of the President in the Verkhovna Rada and performance at YES, the presidential administration is not ready. Although to create anti-corruption court has long and openly demanding international partners: the international monetary Fund (who has hinted that he is not an anti-corruption court, no trenches), the EU delegation in Ukraine, Ministers of European countries, USA. And despite the fact that such court is directly spelled out in the relevant law on the judicial system.
Why the Ukrainian authorities do not fit the idea of creating an anti-corruption court and a fight against corruption in the format of the anti-corruption chamber, the editors LIGA.net asked the experts in the field of law and judicial reform.
Anastasia Krasnoselskaya, lawyer, expert on advocacy of anti-corruption action Center
This is absolute manipulation, which shows only one thing: Petro Poroshenko wants to give the green light to an independent selection procedure of anti-corruption judges. I will remind that the law on courts, which provides for the creation of an anti-corruption court, was adopted almost six years ago, and entered into force a year ago. This year the President has not made a single step to go on to create an anti-corruption court, and now says that there’s no time. In fact, he simply opposes the bill introduced by deputies Sobolev-Syroid, which stipulates the establishment of a competition Commission for the selection of anti-corruption judges. Here, the President does not want, and therefore campaigning for chambers in existing courts. Between these chambers under the guise of the new and old judges can just put the equal sign. This in fact changes nothing.
From what was said in Parliament and on the forum YES, I came to the conclusion that the President is talking about creating a chamber in the Supreme court. But this does not solve the problem with the anti-corruption proceedings, because now things NABOO hung in courts of first instance. To the Supreme court, to appeal, they pace will reach in five years. Now such a backlog of cases about 40% – about 30, if I’m not mistaken. And they hang in there long enough. Some for months, some for a year without the first trial. Just yesterday, once again postponed the first hearing on the Manager Firtash, Director of ztmc the Sivak (accused of embezzlement of funds allegedly 2014-2015 controlled by Group DF company Tolexis Trading Limited, which owns a 49% stake in ZTMK allocated to this enterprise 880 million, of which the Director has listed 492 million UAH in favor of third parties – ed). But the case was taken to court last fall.
Read the opinion: Corruption from the creation of the “anti-corruption chambers” will not be affected
In Parliament is the bill of the Deputy from BPP Sergey Alekseev offers to create anti-corruption chamber in all local courts. But we need to understand and the chamber in the Supreme court of Ukraine, and the chamber in the local courts at this stage can only be created from current judges, no special selection, no guarantees of independence. It’s not exactly the option we need. The Supreme court chamber can be created from which judges are recruited now. I remind you that the appeal criminal court propose such judges as Slinko and Zastawny who took the final decision at the conclusion of the colony Yury Lutsenko. That is engaged in political persecution. We want to see in the anti-corruption chamber in the Supreme court? We think it would be justice? I very much doubt it.
And it is certainly not the independent anti-corruption court, which expects the IMF.
Roman Kuybida, Deputy head of the Board of the Centre for political and legal reforms
Anti-corruption courts we need first to consider cases in the first instance. And President Poroshenko, I understand, refers to the establishment of anti-corruption chamber in the Supreme court of Ukraine. That is, in the last instance, so that it does not solve the problem that has arisen with the delay in the consideration of anti-corruption cases. It’s not exactly out of the situation.
The main idea of the anti-corruption court is to ensure the independence and integrity of judges. But competitive selection of the new Supreme court has shown that there are great doubts of his honesty. I do not support the idea of creating an anti-corruption court on such rules. Strap that put the Highest qualification Commission of judges for future judges APU too low, especially in matters of integrity. Obviously, it must be established by a separate mechanism. A common vision for such a mechanism: it is necessary the creation of a special panel in the structure of the CCG with the involvement of representatives of international organizations, which would have the right to veto any candidate for the position of judge. So they act as guarantors of transparency in the selection procedure. The other option I see.
I think the West and the Ukrainian society would suit an honest, independent judicial body which will be a sufficient level of trust and who will be able to hear cases related to corruption. With a guarantee that corruption will not penetrate into the court itself. If there is the political will of the entire process, from taking the necessary act prior to full operation could take up to a year. But while the idea of creating an anti-corruption promote the chamber so that this chamber was entirely dependent, like all other courts to date, from political power.
Mykhailo Zhernakov, Director of the Foundation DEJURE judicial expert RPR
Petro Poroshenko just don’t want the creation of an independent anti-corruption court. The only way to create such a court is to give this institution a real autonomy, that it was completely divorced from the judicial system. And most importantly – to the selection procedure in this court was different. What is happening now with the selection of the Supreme court, in any case can not be repeated with the anti-corruption court.
Poroshenko trite does not want to investigate corruption cases, which, in particular, may bring to his colleagues and to harm its interests. Views by MPs from the coalition in the Verkhovna Rada – is, of course, part of the criminal process, but not the question of judicial institutions. The most important question is – who will judge. Let’s see what happens with the Affairs of NABOO, as long they are not dealt with in the courts. That’s all. If it will continue to do the Solomensky court – sorry, but the objective procedure we get, and no one will be prosecuted.
Despite the recent statement of Juncker, who the day before had been persuaded to make himself Poroshenko (President of the European Commission said that the EU does not insist on the creation of a separate anti-corruption court, will the chamber – and the mission subsequently had to give explanations to these words of the monarch – ed), all Western partners are talking about the anti-corruption court. I don’t even know how many variations and reports it sounded. But, actually, we don’t care what it will be called. The main thing – two things. First: separate the selection procedure, which will be able to participate international experts to objectively evaluate and select the judges. Second, full autonomy of the court, to enable it to perform its tasks and protection of judges, up to take out the judge for the border in case of threats of physical violence.
Only in this case the judicial system anti-corruption work. And I do not care how it will be called – chamber, court, Tribunal, whatever. It is important, how it will look in functionality and content but not in form.