Reformer of the week – Markiyan Halabala
Lawyer Markiyan Halabala is one of the few remaining candidates for the High Anti-Corruption Court with a reputation for independence.
In 2014 to 2016, Halabala was a member of a commission for the lustration (firing) of judges accused of unlawfully persecuting EuroMaidan protesters.
The High Qualification Commission of Judges and the Public Council of International Experts, a foreign expert panel, on Jan. 22 considered vetoing him, but decided to let him continue his participation in the competition.
See a related story here.
Another remaining candidate for the anti-corruption court with a reputation for independence is Judge Roman Bregei.
Other candidates praised by anti-corruption watchdogs have not been allowed to continue running for jobs at the court.
Specifically, the High Qualification Commission said that one of them, Judge Viktor Fomin, had failed to pass the practical examinations, although there are accusations that the examinations could have been rigged. The commission denies the accusations.
Meanwhile, Larysa Golnyk, a whistleblower judge, was banned from the selection of anti-corruption judges due to being reprimanded for a Facebook post criticizing the authorities. However, she sees the move as revenge for her whistleblowing activities.
The Supreme Court on Jan. 18 canceled the reprimand as unlawful, and Golnyk re-applied for a job at the anti-corruption court.
Anti-reformer of the week – Inna Bilous
Inna Bilous, a candidate for the High Anti-Corruption Court, escaped being vetoed by the Public Council of International Experts or PCIE, a foreign expert panel, on Jan. 21.
However, concerns about her integrity remain. Bilous, a judge at the Ternopil District Administrative Court, banned protesters from gathering near administrative buildings in Ternopil during the EuroMaidan Revolution from Dec. 10, 2013 through Jan. 7, 2014.
She argued that her ban applied only to areas adjacent to government buildings and not to other areas. Bilous also said she had aimed at preventing clashes and the blocking of government institutions.
Roman Maselko, a lawyer for the AutoMaidan anti-corruption watchdog, and Kateryna Butko, an AutoMaidan activist, interpreted Bilous’ decision on the EuroMaidan protests as a violation of the right to peaceful assembly. Butko said the PCIE’s decision not to veto Bilous sets a dangerous precedent of allowing judges involved in persecuting EuroMaidan protesters to keep their jobs.
Vitaly Tytych, ex-coordinator of the Public Integrity Council, argued that Bilous’ ban on peaceful assemblies was arbitrary and violated European standards, as the ban was applied to an unlimited number of protesters and to an arbitrarily broad area. He added that the ban also violated the standards of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.
Another candidate not vetoed by the PCIE is Judge Valeria Chorna. The foreign panel and anti-corruption watchdogs wondered whether her elderly mother could afford buying an apartment with an estimated value of up to Hr 2 million ($110,000). Chorna argued that her mother could afford it, providing a document according to which the latter received $143,615 in wages in 2004 to 2014.
In total, 40 candidates for the anti-corruption court have so far been either vetoed by the PCIE or pulled out themselves, and seven candidates whose integrity and professionalism were considered by the panel were allowed to run further. The PCIE has yet to consider the remaining two candidates.
However, the foreign panel will not consider vetoing 19 out of 55 candidates named by anti-corruption watchdogs on Jan. 9 as not meeting professional ethics and integrity standards. One of the candidates who will not be vetoed by the PCIE, Kyrylo Legkykh, has a joint business with a governor, and there are major questions about the asset declarations of two others – Igor Chaikin and Olga Chaikina.
