Updates to our Terms of Use

We are updating our Terms of Use. Please carefully review the updated Terms before proceeding to our website.

Friday, March 29, 2024 | Back issues
Courthouse News Service Courthouse News Service

Court Finds Ukraine Violated Rights of Fired High Court Judges

Eight former Ukraine Supreme Court judges brought a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights after they were fired following judicial reforms in 2016.

STRASBOURG, France (CN) — Ukraine committed human rights violations when it fired all of its Supreme Court judges during judicial reforms following the so-called Euromaidan protests, Europe’s top rights court held Thursday. 

The European Court of Human Rights found that a 2016 bill that dissolved the Ukrainian Supreme Court and forced judges with lifetime appointments to reapply for their posts violated the European Convention on Human Rights, which established the court nearly 70 years ago.

Eight ex-judges brought a complaint to the Strasbourg-based court after they were not offered one of the 120 judicial positions available on the country’s new Supreme Court despite an order from the country’s Constitutional Court that they should be able to continue their roles. 

The rights court's seven-judge panel ruled in favor of the ousted judges Thursday.

“The government has not demonstrated that the manner in which the applicants had been compelled to compete in order to maintain their right to carry out their judicial duties … could be reconciled with the constitutional principles on the general protection of individual rights and with the specific guarantees relating to tenure of judicial office,”  the ruling states.

A wave of demonstrations broke out in late 2013 and by 2014, forcing then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych out of office and into exile in Russia. The Euromaidan protests, named for a term coined on Twitter, were sparked by Yanukovych’s refusal to sign a cooperation agreement with the European Union, widely seen as a move to bring the country closer to Russia. 

In 2016, the new government, elected in the aftermath of the unrest, passed legislation restructuring the country’s judiciary system, which was widely seen as ineffective and corrupt. These changes included dissolving the previous Supreme Court and creating an entirely new body. 

A selection process was opened for judicial posts and 17 of the 21 previous judges applied, including seven of the eight plaintiffs in the case before the European Court of Human Rights. None were hired. 

Another group of judges complained to Ukraine's Constitutional Court, which found the government had violated the country’s constitution and the judges should be allowed to continue their terms.

“Despite the favourable decision by the Constitutional Court, they had not been permitted to resume their judicial functions,” the rights court’s Fifth Section noted in Thursday's ruling.

In June 2020, the Ukrainian parliament drafted a bill that would allow the previous judges to continue their terms, but so far it hasn’t become law. 

In its ruling, the court noted that the situation was complicated and that it didn’t want to deter countries from making changes to their judicial systems as needed.

“The court wishes to make it clear at the outset that [the] convention does not prevent states from taking legitimate and necessary decisions to reform the judiciary,” the ruling states.

It’s not the first time Ukraine has faced challenges to its judiciary at the Strasbourg court. In 2018, the court found that a Ukrainian oversight committee to demote the president of a Kyiv court violated rules on judicial impartiality and independence. Created in 1953 by the European Convention on Human Rights, the court protects the political and civil rights of Europeans.

Each of the former judges was awarded 5,000 euros ($5,900) in damages.

Follow Molly Quell on Twitter

Follow @mollyquell
Categories / Civil Rights, Courts, Government, International

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Loading...