On March 6, the High Qualification Commission of Judges (HQCJ) announced the results of the competition to the High Anti-Corruption Court (HAC) and to the Supreme Court (SC). 8 candidates whom civil society organizations had determined unworthy of this position a few months ago were among the winners of the HAC. The Public Integrity Council, a body created of civil society members to assist the HQCJ in assessing the integrity and professional ethics of judges, found 16 winners of the competition to the Supreme Court to have a sleazy reputation. Why the competition to the HAC is a success and to the Supreme Court is a failure will be explained lower.
OP-ED
Iryna Shyba: How Ukraine can prosecute corrupt officials
An activist dressed as a monster judge stands in front of the Supreme Court on Sept. 13, 2017. He and other protesters demonstrated against the High Qualification Commission’s decision to nominate 30 Supreme Court judges deemed as corrupt or dishonest by the Public Integrity Council, a civil-society watchdog.
