APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES BY THE PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE: KEY ASPECTS OF DOMESTIC JUDICIAL PRACTICE

Abstract

This scientific article is devoted to the topical issues of the implementation of the procedure for the appointment of judges by the President of Ukraine after the 2016 constitutional reform, in particular, the main aspects of judicial practice in lawsuits regarding the recognition of the inaction of the President of Ukraine as unlawful, which consisted in the failure to issue a decree on the appointment of a judge within the time limits established by law.The Constitution of Ukraine and the Law of Ukraine “On the Judicial System and Status of Judges” establish the exclusive power of the President of Ukraine to appoint judges upon the recommendation of the High Council of Justice within thirty days by issuing a decree. The violation by the President of Ukraine of the thirty-day period provided for by law for issuing a decree on the appointment of a judge gave rise to lawsuits challenging such inaction and contributed to the formation of relevant judicial practice, the key points of which are reflected in the legal positions of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court.An analysis of the judicial practice and legal positions of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court after the 2016 judicial reform shows different approaches to assessing the untimely issuance of decrees. Initially, the untimely issuance of a decree by the President of Ukraine appointing a person to the position of judge was not always recognized as unlawful inaction, and the workload of the head of state was taken into account. Further emphasis was placed on strengthening the protection of plaintiffs’ rights, recognizing the President’s inaction as a continuing violation that can be appealed regardless of the time limits. At the same time, the position remained unchanged that the proper way to protect the violated right is to demand that the inaction of the President of Ukraine regarding the failure to issue a decree on the appointment of a judge be recognized as unlawful and that the President of Ukraine be obliged to consider the submission of the High Council of Justice.This dynamic in judicial practice indicates a strengthening of the role of the judiciary in ensuring the rule of law and balance between the branches of government.