SC Plenum Addressed to the Parliament as for Draft Laws on Amending Procedure Codes and on Bringing Judges to Disciplinary Liability for Adoption of Cancelled Judgment

On 15 November 2019 the Plenum of the Supreme Court addressed to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine as for the Draft Law of Ukraine “On Amending the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine, the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, the Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine Regarding Upgrading the Review of Judgments in Appeal and Cassation Procedure” (registration No. 2314) and pointed on the necessity of its additional processing, as well as approved the relevant opinion.

Dmytro Luspenyk, Secretary of the Plenum of the Supreme Court, noted that several norms of the draft laws would not promote the decrease of workload for court but would only increase it, particularly, because the proposed amendments also formed artificial grounds for the prolongation of the term for cassation appeal of judgments.

The Plenum Secretary underlined that any new approach to the determination of the procedure of reviewing judgments should be based on the idea of increasing the efficiency of judicial power, ensuring the realization of the principle of legal certainty, as well as strengthening the authority of the Supreme Court as the highest judicial body. It is very important, since it concerns the compliance with international standards of the reviewing judgments system.

Besides, the Plenum of the Supreme Court decided to address to the Parliament regarding the Draft Law of Ukraine “On Amending the Law of Ukraine “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges” Regarding Upgrading the Procedure of Bringing Judges to Disciplinary Liability” (registration No. 2271).

While presenting the speech devoted to the noted issue, the President of the Administrative Cassation Court within the Supreme Court Mykhailo Smokovych put emphasis on the fact that in Article 126 of the Constitution of Ukraine it is directly noted that a judge shall not be brought to disciplinary liability for a judgment adopted by him/her, except for the commitment of a crime or a disciplinary misdemeanor. And members of the Parliament cannot be unaware of this fact. Such provision complies with international standards in justice sphere.

At the same time, the Draft Law No. 2271 provides the possibility of bringing a judge to disciplinary liability for a cancelled or changed judgment.

Mykhailo Smokovych remarked that the Consultative Council of European Judges had repeatedly put emphasis on the inadmissibility of bringing a judge to liability for performing his/her duties. If a judge could be brought to liability for the adopted judgment, it was impossible to preserve the judicial independence and democratic balance of power branches. The same opinions were included into judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.

Plenum of the Supreme Court concluded that the adoption of the Draft Law No. 2271 would result in the violation of the principle of judicial independence and approved relevant opinion.

It should be reminded that the SC Plenum has also addressed to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine with a motion on the constitutionality of separate provisions of laws of Ukraine “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges” and “On the High Council of Justice” as amended in the Law of Ukraine No. 193-IX “On Amending the Law of Ukraine “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges” and Some Other Laws of Ukraine Regarding the Operation of Judicial Governance Bodies”.