Editor’s note: Every week Kyiv Post journalist Oleg Sukhov picks a winner and loser in Ukraine’s drive to transform itself into a rule-of-law, European-style democracy.
Reformer of the week – Andriy Kozlov
On June 27, Ukraine’s Human Rights Ombudsman Lyudmila Denisova fired Andriy Kozlov, a member of the High Qualification Commission of Judges.
Denisova, who did not respond to a request for comment, claimed that he did not have enough professional experience to be a commission member. Kozlov, who was appointed by Denisova’s predecessor in 2016, said he would dispute his dismissal in court.
Ukraine’s major civil society watchdogs released a joint statement on July 2, saying that Kozlov’s firing was unlawful. They also said that Kozlov had been sacked for criticizing a qualification assessment that allowed corrupt judges to stay in office.
Earlier, on June 12, Kozlov accused the commission of violating its procedures during the qualification assessment of judges. He said that the commission had voted to override a veto by the Public Integrity Council, the judiciary’s civil society’s watchdog, on Judge Inna Gryban’s employment, but failed to garner the necessary votes. But, instead of firing the judge — as they should have by law — the members just delayed the meeting to vote again, Kozlov said.
In recent weeks, Kozlov has lambasted the qualification assessment of judges.
He argued that the commission had taken an extremely soft approach. Kozlov said that the commission has confused the assessment of judges, in which they must prove their integrity, with a criminal trial, in which the defendant is deemed innocent until proven guilty. As a result, most judges lacking integrity remain on the job, and very few are fired, according to Kozlov.
The High Qualification Commission has denied accusations of wrongdoing.
Anti-reformer of the week – Nadiya Danylevych
Nadiya Danylevych is a judge on Ukraine’s Supreme Court, an institution not without its controversies. But on June 30, she was responsible for a particularly big one.
That day, as presiding judge, she ruled that the Central Election Commission’s refusal to register ex-President Viktor Yanukovych’s Chief of Staff Andriy Klyuyev as a candidate in the July 21 parliamentary election was unlawful.
In that way, the court effectively required the commission to re-consider its decision, and Klyuyev was registered. The Supreme Court did not respond to a request for comment by press time.
Under Ukrainian law, only those who have resided in Ukraine for five years prior to the election can run. Klyuyev fled Ukraine after Yanukovych was ousted as a result of the EuroMaidan Revolution on Feb. 22, 2014. Clearly, he had not lived in country for five years.
But the court argued that there was not enough evidence that Klyuyev resided abroad, despite the Prosecutor General’s Office providing evidence of the former chief of staff’s flight to Russia. Klyuyev claimed that he had lived in Russian-occupied Donetsk, which is legally part of Ukraine.
Despite his claims, Klyuyev had officially informed Interpol that he resided in Moscow. Moreover, Ukrainian investigators have tried to reach him in Donetsk and received responses that he was not living there.
As a result of protests and additional evidence provided by the Interior Ministry and the Security Service of Ukraine, the Central Election Commission re-considered its decision again on July 3 and canceled Klyuyev’s registration.
Klyuyev has been charged with embezzling Hr 1.5 billion ($57.3 million) and with organizing an unlawful crackdown on EuroMaidan protesters on Nov. 30, 2013.
