Although the High Council of Justice’s dismissal of Judge Larisa Tsokol purportedly has nothing to do with her refusal to place former Georgian President and Ukrainian opposition politician Mikheil Saakashvili under house arrest, there seem very real grounds for concern

Since Larysa Holnyk refused to provide a corrupt court ruling and reported the offer, she has faced harassment, prolonged failure to grant her indefinite tenure and a savage attack

So when should we expect the District Administrative Court to reinstate Viktor Yanukovych? This was one of many sour comments following the news on 11 December that the court in Kyiv had reinstated Roman Nasirov to the post of Head of the State Fiscal Service

The High Council of Justice [HCJ] has suspended Larisa Tsokol from serving as a judge pending a decision as to whether she should be dismissed from her post.

Ukraine’s main anti-corruption NGOs have given a damning assessment of President Petro Poroshenko’s draft Law on a High Anti-Corruption Court and called for its withdrawal and reworking to take the Council of Europe Venice Commission’s recommendations into account.

A court in the Kyiv oblast has acquitted Petro Melnyk, the former Head of Ukraine’s National Tax Service University, finding “no proof of a crime” in Melnyk’s sale of four buildings belonging to the university to a company founded by his wife, son and father-in-law.  This is the second time that Melnyk has been acquitted on separate corruption charges, though the first acquittal was later revoked by another court.

Ukraine’s future rests on whether its judicial reforms will bring about the rule of law for the first time in its history, or whether political influence continues to contaminate its system. It appears the latter is the case.

A critical overview of changes to Ukraine’s Constitutional Court

The changes, proposed by President Poroshenko, would be a serious step backwards away from the greater court transparency achieved since Maidan

Maidan is continuing with efforts to prevent yet another rejuggling of a reform-resistant status quo through the appointment of seriously compromised judges to the Supreme Court

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau [NABU] has reacted with anger after a court rejected its application to have a Kyiv judge caught taking a huge bribe remanded in custody. The agency pulls no punches, calling the move sabotage and rejecting the court’s attempt to hide behind a dubious ‘statement’ issued recently by the High Council of Justice.

Among the candidates for posts in the Supreme Court [SCU] are the former President of the Court who justified Viktor Yanukovych’s draconian ‘dictatorship’ laws and judges involved in politically motivated prosecutions. The CHESNO civic movement has sounded the alarm to ensure that purportedly fair competition does not re-establish the heavily tarnished status quo.

Corrupt judges can breathe a sigh of relief. An amendment to Ukraine’s Constitution restricting judges’ immunity from arrest in cases where they have been caught committing an offence has been deftly ‘readjusted’ by the High Council of Justice

While broadly welcoming the law, the Reanimation Package of Reforms propose some amendments to ensure mechanisms of response to judges’ complaints of interference in their work, and to prevent preservation of the old system

Roman Zavorotny, who is accused of a key role in arming ‘titushki’ or paid thugs with police machine guns, was released from custody just after midnight on Sunday morning

Only one in 100 complaints achieved its end in2011-2012, however analysts point out that where judges cannot fail to infringe time and other constraints because of their excessive workload, disciplinary proceedings can easily be used as pressure.

With the imminent retirement of the candidate elected as a temporary compromise measure after Supreme Court judges resisted pressure from those in power to install the latter’s preferred candidate, it is likely that this time the favoured candidate will be chosen

Corrupt judges can rest easy, their income declarations will not be seen by anybody except the heads of the courts.

Roman Kuybida, Deputy Head of the Centre for Political and Legal Reform, believes that Law No. 9635, just adopted, on Procedure for Court Proceedings makes it possible to ensure possession of property received through dubious court rulings

As feared, parliament has undermined a vital mechanism for ensuring public monitoring of court rulings by allowing judges to themselves determine which court rulings will be entered in the “Single Register of Court Rulings”