The advisory group of experts conducted interviews with candidates for the Constitutional Court: what issues became key

The Advisory Group of Experts (AGEE) has completed public interviews with candidates applying for two positions of judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine under the quota of the Congress of Judges. The interviews, which took place on July 31 and August 1, became one of the decisive stages of the competitive selection after analyzing the candidates’ dossiers.

During the interviews, the experts assessed not only the professional competence of the candidates, but also their integrity, academic ethics, origin of property, and ability to provide convincing explanations regarding circumstances that could be of public interest.

One of the most discussed candidates was the acting Chief of Staff of the Supreme Court, Rasim Babanli. The main attention was focused on the issues of his family’s financial integrity, in particular the acquisition of real estate and the origin of funds, as well as the use of Russian scientific sources in his PhD dissertation. At the same time, no significant comments were made during the interview regarding his professional experience or disciplinary history.

Judge of the High Anti-Corruption Court Oleksiy Kravchuk answered questions about academic integrity, the origin of funds for the construction of property, and lawsuits related to the accrual of judicial remuneration. At the same time, no negative information about his disciplinary liability or integrity was found in open sources.

The DGE paid special attention to the judge of the Commercial Court of Lviv Region Olesia Nykon, who is re-participating in the competition after a previous negative conclusion regarding moral qualities. During the interview, she tried to refute the experts’ remarks, explaining the issues regarding the value of the sold property and academic integrity.

The shortest interview was with the representative of the Prosecutor General’s Office Oleksiy Klymenko. The DGE members reported that they received comprehensive written explanations even before the interview, so there were almost no additional questions. The main factor in the assessment remains the conclusions of the previous competition regarding the level of professional competence.

Judge of the Kyiv Court of Appeal Svitlana Muzychko answered questions about receiving official housing, an administrative case about a traffic accident, and certain inaccuracies in declarations. These circumstances became key when assessing her integrity.

In contrast, Professor Oksana Klymenko became one of the candidates to whom the Advisory Group of Experts had the fewest questions. Previously, she had already received positive conclusions on compliance with the integrity criteria twice, and during the current interview, she actually only provided individual explanations on issues that could be of public interest.

After the interviews, the Advisory Group of Experts must prepare final conclusions on the candidates’ compliance with the criteria of high moral qualities and professional competence. These conclusions will become one of the key elements of the further competitive selection of judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine.