
On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
In 2019, the powers of the High Qualification Commission of Judges (HQCJ) were terminated due to the lack of renewal and cleansing of the judiciary. The Commission’s work was effectively paralyzed as a result of political deadlock. This created the need to restore its functioning under new rules.
Draft law No. 3711-d became a compromise between the authorities, civil society, and international partners. It закрепed a decisive role for international experts in the Selection Commission responsible for evaluating candidates to the High Qualification Commission of Judges. The first composition of the Selection Commission included six members—three judges (or retired judges) and three international experts—and their vote became decisive in the event of a tie when selecting HQCJ members.
The importance of the decisive role of international experts in these procedures was also emphasized by international partners and the then-Chair of the Venice Commission, Gianni Buquicchio.
The law was supported in 2021 by 293 Members of Parliament, while amendment No. 453 on the decisive vote of international experts received 255 votes. It entered into force a few months after parliamentary approval.
This became a key stage of judicial reform: it paved the way for the formation of a new High Qualification Commission of Judges, the launch of competitions for thousands of vacant judicial positions, and the restoration of trust in judicial selection. At the same time, the mandate of international experts in the commission was limited to two years after the final formation of the body, which, according to experts, created risks for the sustainability of the reform.
In June 2025, the mandate of the Selection Commission with international experts expired. Therefore, draft law No. 13382 was registered in Parliament, proposing to restore the participation of international experts to ensure the continuity of the Commission’s work and the quality of the selection process.
European Commission spokesperson Guillaume Mercier welcomed Ukraine’s steps toward restoring the independence of anti-corruption institutions and outlined a clear list of next obligations for Ukraine, including the reinstatement of international experts in the Selection Commission for the High Qualification Commission of Judges.
Filters
Рівненська область

#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
Житомирська область



#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
Черкаська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
For
-
Absent
Київська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
-
Absent
Харківська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
-
Absent
Львівська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
-
Absent
Закарпатська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
-
Did not vote
м. Київ
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
-
Did not vote
-
Absent
Полтавська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
-
Absent
Вінницька область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
-
Abstained
Тернопільська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
Чернівецька область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
For
Дніпропетровська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
-
Did not vote
-
Absent
Херсонська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
For
Сумська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
-
Absent
Луганська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
For
-
Against
-
Abstained
Івано-Франківська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
-
Absent
Кіровоградська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
For
-
Absent
Миколаївська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
Одеська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
-
Abstained
-
Did not vote
Волинська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
For
-
Did not vote
-
Absent
Чернігівська область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
Донецька область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
For
-
Against
-
Abstained
-
Did not vote
-
Show all
Absent
Хмельницька область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
For
-
Did not vote
-
Absent
Запорізька область
























#3711-д - On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges
-
Show all
For
-
Abstained
-
Absent



































































































































































































