Contact center of the Ukrainian Judiciary 044 207-35-46
On 30 June 2026, the Supreme Court hosted the Second Meeting of the Subcommittee of the EU - Ukraine Parliamentary Association Committee on Ukraine’s Accession to the European Union. The meeting focused on the functioning of Ukraine’s judicial system during the full-scale war unleashed by the Russian Federation, as well as further steps in the development of the judiciary, taking into account the opening of the first negotiating cluster “Fundamentals of the EU Accession Process”.
During the meeting, Members of the European Parliament, representatives of the European Parliament Secretariat, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, judicial governance bodies, international experts, and judges of the Supreme Court discussed Ukraine’s progress in implementing the measures under negotiating Chapter 23 “Judiciary & Fundamental Rights”, the status of the Rule of Law Roadmap implementation, the specifics of Ukrainian courts’ operations under wartime conditions, and the results of reforms in the context of European integration.
Opening the discussion, President of the Supreme Court Stanislav Kravchenko, on behalf of the entire Ukrainian judicial community, expressed gratitude to the representatives of the European Parliament for their consistent support of our state in its struggle for independence and a European future.
He noted that, under the conditions of Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine, the national courts have demonstrated extraordinary resilience by continuing to administer justice in such challenging circumstances. Today, the scope of activity of Ukrainian courts is quite broad: they examine cases involving war crimes (according to the Office of the Prosecutor General, as of the end of June 2026, more than 239,000 war crimes have been registered), crimes against the foundations of Ukraine’s national security, corruption offences; resolve issues related to internal displacement, compensation for war-related damage, social protection of citizens in disputes with the state, and more.
“We are aware that our efforts will yield worthy results only if European standards are upheld. That is why Ukraine chose the path of European integration many years ago,” emphasized the President of the Supreme Court. This July marks 29 years since Ukraine ratified the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The national judicial system continues to cooperate with the European Court of Human Rights — in particular, Ukrainian courts apply its case law in their decisions, thereby forming relevant judicial practice at the national level. At the same time, work continues on the analysis of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Accession to the large European family remains particularly relevant for Ukraine, as this step will determine the post-war reconstruction of Ukraine and its development as a democratic state governed by the rule of law, added Stanislav Kravchenko. The Supreme Court continues to act actively, ensuring in cooperation with the national parliament the fulfilment of European integration requirements, in particular those set out in the Rule of Law Roadmap.
According to Stanislav Kravchenko, the priority areas for the national legal system in the context of approaching EU standards are currently:
Member of the European Parliament and co-chair of the EU – Ukraine Parliamentary Association Committee Pekka Toveri assured that the European Union remains steadfast in its support for Ukraine in resisting Russian aggression and in its pursuit of EU membership, as the EU and Ukraine share common values.
Pekka Toveri explained that the Subcommittee on Accession was established specifically to enable more effective cooperation with candidate countries for EU membership and to involve stakeholders (national experts, government representatives, and civil society organisations) in direct dialogue to identify priority tasks on the path to Ukraine’s full integration into the European community.
Expressing gratitude to the Ukrainian side for the opportunity for open exchange of views, the co-chair of the EU – Ukraine Parliamentary Association Committee emphasised: “The rule of law and the functioning of the judicial system are not purely legal issues. They are at the core of the broader large-scale transformation process”.
Secretary of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court Serhii Pohribnyi noted that Ukraine’s commitment to the fundamental democratic values on which the European Union is based has a practical, not merely declarative, dimension. National courts, primarily the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, have long begun to take into account sources of EU law and the legal positions of the Court of Justice of the European Union in their own law enforcement practice.
In particular, in its resolution of 3 August 2022 in case No. 910/9627/20, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court formulated a legal conclusion on the appropriateness of taking into account, in Ukraine’s law enforcement practice, the findings and principles set out in the decisions of the Court of Justice of the EU, even if they concern other states.
Serhii Pohribnyi cited several examples of the application of EU law sources in the practice of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court. Among them is the resolution of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court dated 15 February 2023 in case No. 910/18214/19, concerning a claim by a former shareholder of an insolvent bank seeking to declare invalid transactions carried out during the procedure of withdrawing the bank from the market with the participation of the state as an investor. In resolving the issue of the effectiveness of the remedy chosen by the claimant and interpreting the national norm, as well as substantiating the conclusion about the ineffectiveness of the chosen remedy, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court referred to Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of credit institutions and investment firms.
In case No. 910/13988/20 (resolution of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court dated 17 April 2024) concerning the recognition of a medicinal product’s trade mark as well-known and the invalidation of a Ukrainian certificate of registration of a mark for goods and services, the Supreme Court referred obiter dictum to the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union in order to illustrate the importance that good faith in registering a conflicting mark may have in law when limiting the right to protection of the owner of a well-known mark.
As noted by the President of the Administrative Cassation Court within the Supreme Court, Ihor Dashutin, Ukraine is pursuing EU membership under extremely difficult conditions of full-scale war, without halting the reform process and demonstrating its ability to act in accordance with the principles of democracy and the rule of law under unprecedented circumstances. An important part of this institutional resilience is the courts themselves, which have not ceased their work amid enemy rocket attacks, air raid alerts, the forced relocation of judges, and changes in territorial jurisdiction for courts located in territories temporarily occupied by Russia or in frontline areas.
Every day, citizens continue to turn to the courts for protection of their rights, the state continues to enforce court decisions, and the Supreme Court ensures the unity of case law. According to Ihor Dashutin, this is the best confirmation of the institutional maturity of the Ukrainian state. The rule of law, independent justice, and respect for human rights are not only Ukraine’s obligations to the EU, but also the foundation of our state’s resilience, summarised the President of the Administrative Cassation Court.
Larysa Rohach, President of the Commercial Cassation Court within the Supreme Court, noted that commercial jurisdiction, by administering justice in the sphere of economic relations, is one of the key elements in protecting investments and building connections between state institutions, business entities, and citizens. In the context of the European integration process, it is important that the country has a predictable legal environment based on the principles of the rule of law, because it is in such an environment that business develops, investments are attracted, and the economy functions effectively.
According to the President of the Commercial Cassation Court of the Supreme Court, judges of the commercial jurisdiction are already active participants in the process of adapting Ukrainian law to the law of the European Union. They ensure the proper application of legislative novelties adopted as part of European integration reforms and participate in the official screening of Ukrainian legislation under the negotiating chapters related to corporate law and intellectual property law. In addition, the Supreme Court is a co-executor of measures under the National Programme for the Adaptation of Ukrainian Legislation to the Law of the European Union (acquis communautaire) in the field of intellectual property, and decisions of the Supreme Court are included in the WIPO Lex-Judgments database, which provides access to the most important court decisions from various countries around the world in the field of intellectual property law.
At the same time, Larysa Rohach emphasised that the approximation of Ukrainian law to European standards occurs not only through legislative changes. According to her, case law also plays an important role in this process, as it must adapt to societal needs and European standards. In this context, the speaker drew attention to the concept of the “reasonable legislator”, which is part of a dynamic approach to the interpretation of legal norms. This concept implies that a court should be guided not only by the intentions of the legislator who adopted the law in the past, but also by how the relevant norm might be understood by the legislator under current conditions.
Overall, Larysa Rohach noted that the Supreme Court directs its efforts towards forming legal positions that enable the effective resolution of complex legal issues through the proper interpretation of current legislation, taking into account European standards, without the need to amend the law.
Acting President of the Criminal Cassation Court within the Supreme Court Nataliia Antoniuk emphasised that Ukrainian judges, when considering criminal proceedings, not only analyse the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine but also actively apply the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. She also spoke about the high standards of proof in the national judicial system, particularly regarding the requirements for the use of evidence obtained from open sources (OSINT).
“There is no doubt that the standards of justice must be upheld even in times of war. At the same time, the specificity of criminal justice lies in the fact that it provides for the possibility of the most severe restrictions on rights and freedoms, so maximum caution must be exercised when applying such restrictive measures,” noted Nataliia Antoniuk.
Regarding the specifics of considering the new category of war crimes cases, the speaker highlighted the role of European partners in disseminating knowledge among Ukrainian judges on the application of the Geneva Conventions, the interpretation of the practice of the International Criminal Court, and the experience of international tribunals. Nataliia Antoniuk added that the main task of criminal jurisdiction is to hold accountable not just anyone, but the person who actually committed the crime. She expressed hope that, through the joint efforts of Ukraine and the European community, those who commit war crimes in Ukraine will receive fair punishment.
President of the Civil Cassation Court within the Supreme Court Maryna Chervynska emphasised that Ukraine strives to become a member of the European Union and that the Ukrainian judicial system, including the civil jurisdiction, has made significant efforts over the past years to make this a reality.
Using examples from civil cases, the speaker demonstrated the dynamics of changes in law enforcement towards harmonisation with European legal standards. One of the most illustrative categories of cases concerns family and children. While eight years ago Ukrainian court decisions were dominated by the principle that a young child could not be removed from the mother except in cases where it violated the child’s rights, following the European Court of Human Rights judgments in the cases of Mamchur v. Ukraine and Hunt v. Ukraine, national judicial practice began to focus on the principle of equal rights of the father and mother and the need to determine the best interests of the child.
At the same time, the civil jurisdiction faces new challenges related to armed aggression, particularly in the area of labour relations, as well as the recovery of property from a bona fide acquirer in light of new norms of substantive law, noted the President of the Civil Cassation Court.
Regarding the implementation of measures provided for in the Rule of Law Roadmap, Member of the High Council of Justice Dmytro Lukianov reported that the measures planned for 2025 had been completed on time, and the implementation of the 2026 plan is ongoing. The speaker drew attention to the personnel and financial challenges facing the judicial system, in particular the shortage of judges and insufficient funding, and expressed hope that, with the support of international partners, Ukraine will fully fulfil the commitments set out in the Roadmap by 2027.
Member of the High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine Vitalii Hatseliuk informed about the progress of large-scale competitions to fill nearly 2,400 vacancies in courts of various levels. He noted that more than 12,000 candidates had participated in the selection procedures, emphasised the openness of the selection process, cooperation with the Public Integrity Council, and the role of the National School of Judges of Ukraine in training candidates, and reported on the first recommendations for the appointment of judges to the highest specialised courts.
Member of the High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine Ruslan Sydorovych spoke about the implementation of competitions for the newly created highest specialised administrative courts. He noted that these courts are expected to begin their work by the end of the year as part of Ukraine’s European integration commitments. The speaker also emphasised the need to ensure the continuous operation of judicial governance bodies in order to avoid situations where the High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine and the High Council of Justice were unable to exercise their powers for extended periods.
The key areas of activity of the Council of Judges of Ukraine were outlined by the Head of the Council of Judges of Ukraine, Vitalii Salikhov. Among the priorities, he named the selection of judges to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, ensuring the continuous operation of judicial governance bodies, overcoming the shortage of personnel, and increasing the openness of the judiciary. The speaker also drew attention to the problem of staff shortages in court secretariats due to low salaries and reported on work to improve mechanisms for verifying judges’ integrity and regulating conflicts of interest.
The importance of the rule of law as a key condition for Ukraine’s progress towards EU membership was emphasised by the Head of the Ukraine2EU Programme, Mantė Makauskaitė. She highlighted the preparation of the Interim Report on the assessment of benchmarks, which will evaluate not only legislative changes but also the practical implementation of reforms. She noted Ukraine’s progress in strengthening the judicial system even under wartime conditions and confirmed the Ukraine2EU Programme’s readiness to continue supporting Ukrainian institutions on the path to EU membership.
Member of the Ukrainian Parliament and co-chair of the EU – Ukraine Parliamentary Association Committee Vadym Halaichuk, marking the opening of the first negotiating cluster “Fundamentals of the EU Accession Process”, stressed the need to develop mechanisms for consultations, error correction, and alignment of positions with the European Parliament in the process of further reforms. He also noted that the work of the Subcommittee of the EU - Ukraine Parliamentary Association Committee on Ukraine’s Accession to the European Union should be as closely aligned as possible with the implementation of practical tasks in the negotiation process.
_03_03.png)