Majority of Ukrainians do not trust the courts

It smells of paint and quicklime inside the Ministry of Justice at 13 Horodetsky Street after recent renovations. On a small pedestal in the stairwell is a statue of Themis holding a sword in her right hand and a pair of scales in her left. The scales are an ancient symbol of justice. The scales of justice weigh good and evil as well as the lifetime deeds and misdeeds of mortals. The posthumous destiny of people depends on which way the scales tip. The sword in Themis’s hand is a symbol of retribution. It is double-edged because the law not only punishes but warns.

When you go past this statue, you can’t help thinking that something is wrong. You stop in front of the mute stone figure for an instant and begin to understand: Themis is white, while the judicial system in this country is blacker than night by virtue of its corruption and dependence.

Various opinion polls show that Ukrainians have no trust in the courts. They are convinced that the path to Themis’s judgment passes exclusively through the wallet. The question arises: is there such a thing as a court of law in Ukraine? The Day spoke with Yevhen KORNIICHUK, First Deputy Minister of Justice. Since our interlocutor is also a member of the Verkhovna Rada, his answers were a mixture of bureaucratic restraint and parliamentary independence.

Mr. Korniichuk, you are one of the authors of the judicial and legal part of the Ukrainian Breakthrough program. Can you briefly describe the essence of this section of the document?

The Ukrainian Breakthrough sets out a very clear-cut program of actions to reform the judicial system. It is about establishing a three-tier system, one that is transparent, accessible, and comprehensible to the people. It is an open secret today that it is difficult even for judges to categorize a case (for example, administrative or economic) because the law explains this in extremely vague terms. The program also suggests introducing a competition-based selection of candidates for the office of a judge, because now this is often done on the basis of nepotism or cronyism.

The courts should be accessible to all people; hence our vision of a three-tier system. We think that people do not need to think about the jurisdiction of which court to go to. There should be a building with a sign reading “Courthouse” where the lawsuit will be filed, and the court should decide under what jurisdiction — administrative, economic, or civil — this case will be heard. As for raising the responsibility of judges, we are planning to set up standing disciplinary commissions that will be looking into public complaints promptly. Naturally, an individual even vaguely suspected of corruption, should not be working in the courts, and we will be doing our best in this direction.

How long will this take?

Judicial reform is one of the key goals, but no government can carry it out in a single term of office. The legislative process is already underway in this sphere, and we are taking an active part in it. I cannot say exactly how long it will take, but we are moving ahead as fast as we can. We are also going to be involving judges in the legislative process. I am certain that our ideas will spark interest among judges who want the system to be cleansed.

IMMUNITY IS NOT IMPUNITY BUT A WAY TO AVOID PRESSURE

According to a poll conducted by the Democratic Initiatives Foundation, 62.7 percent of Ukrainians do not trust the courts. With this in view, what should be cleansed first of all?

You know, these data show a need for truly profound and radical changes in the system. Unfortunately, the problem of the legislative and executive branches of power is that both of these branches want to influence the courts, to have their own “pocket court.” This is a tremendous problem because, under the Constitution, the judicial branch is independent.

De jure.

And de facto. We see colossal pressure being exerted on judges when they are being appointed or transferred from one court to another. Our courts will be handing down unbiased rulings only if our judicial system is European or American, i.e., absolutely independent from other branches of power. First, the appointment of judges should be transparent and competition-based, and the system should be funded to a full extent. The judicial system has never been furnished with even 90 percent of the required budgetary funds. Do you known that trial courts very often do not have enough money to buy stamps and envelopes to send a summons? If judges are in such a plight, what kind of justice can we expect them to hand down?

Today many politicians are saying that judges should be stripped of immunity. But the problem is that judges enjoy less immunity than defense lawyers. While any investigator can open a criminal case against a judge, only a district attorney can do this with respect to a defense lawyer. This is just one glaring example. So the question is not to abolish immunity altogether, but to introduce rational immunity in compliance with world standards. Immunity should be sufficient for a judge to administer justice independently. Immunity is not impunity; it is a way to avoid pressure, which in theory can be exerted by the state as well as private entities. So when politicians are suggesting that judges be stripped of immunity, they had better look at themselves in the mirror first.

PEOPLE CAN BE DEPRIVED OF LIBERTY BUT NOT OF DIGNITY

At the Ministry of Justice you deal with the penitentiary system. What changes are being planned in this field?

One of my duties is chairing the Penitentiary Department. This sphere calls for countless amendments to the law. But in addition to this important field, I am in charge of representing the interests of the state in Ukrainian and foreign courts, submitting bills to parliament, maintaining links with the Verkhovna Rada, etc. Frankly, it is difficult to say which of these spheres has priority because they are all very important. You know that cases are now being heard about the defense of state interests in the oil and gas sector. As you know, the prime minister recently announced that it is crucial to put an end to RosUkrEnergo’s monopoly, and the courts are already dealing with this. But the state of affairs in the penitentiary system also requires special attention because one-third of all complaints to the Council of Europe and the European Court are about the conditions in Ukrainian correctional facilities (usually about inhumane treatment and poor living conditions). In some cases, even the mentally impaired are not kept in isolation. There are absolutely unacceptable conditions for those suffering from tuberculosis or AIDS. Unfortunately, there are many such people. Sometimes investigative bodies decide without any valid grounds to extend the term of pretrial detention. As a result, people whose guilt has not been proved remain isolated from society. There are very many problems that can be roughly divided into three categories.

What are they?

The first one is the lack of laws, and believe me there is so much work to do that I can talk for hours about this. Briefly, it is about introducing changes to the criminal and penitentiary law in order to humanize it further, as well as to the law regulating the rights and duties of those who work in the system (although they are doing extremely difficult work, they do not enjoy the same status as military servicemen, policemen or, public prosecutors). The civil law also needs changing because, for example, the Family Code does not allow prisoners to file for divorce at their own wish. Right now prisoners must personally bring the application to a marriage registration office. But do you really think a prisoner will be released from jail to do this? This is an important human rights issue that needs to be addressed. Incidentally, this issue, like most others, does not require additional funding. So they should be resolved immediately.

The second issue is of an administrative and economic nature. It is about building new, modern short— and long-term detention facilities that conform to European standards.

Do we have a lack of these types of facilities?

They are in terrible condition! One-half of these facilities were built eons ago, and it is simply impossible to house prisoners in them. First of all, I would focus on pretrial jails for people who have not been found guilty yet. They are often released and told, sorry, the state made a mistake where you’re concerned.

And sometimes they can be shot right on the doorstep of a court.

Unfortunately, this also happens.

The third direction is...

I would roughly call it humanitarian and educational. Today, about 50,000 people work in the penitentiary system, and there are 150,000 prisoners. Again, this figure does not meet European standards. We have to upgrade the skills of corrections officers and prepare the convicts for a life of freedom. There are already pilot projects to provide prisoners with a vocational education. Unfortunately, they are only a few of these projects and their number should be increased. If we do not want people to re-offend and sent back to jail, we must do our best to re-socialize them.

How are you going to solve the problem of the Lukianivka Pre-Detention Center, where people are often killed?

Our team has not studied all the problems yet. It takes years to solve these kinds of problems. We’ll be doing our utmost to put our intentions and ideas into practice as soon as possible. The point is that quickly does not mean one month. Incidentally, one of the priorities announced by the prime minister is to study the possibility of moving pretrial jails outside of big cities, as it is done all over the world.

Out of esthetic considerations or...

There are many reasons. It is a matter of security, it frees up urban space, and, of course, esthetics. I do not think the residents of Kyiv are too happy to see vans with barred windows next to their houses. Lukianivka can free up space for the construction of a modern housing complex or a hotel.

And where can the jail be moved? To Koncha-Zaspa, as a kind of beacon for the VIPs that live there?

The pre-detention center should be moved out of the city. I know that in Soviet times some land was made available for this, and it is still vacant.

I would like to ask you about the isolated nature of detention facilities. Are there any changes in sight?

I know that the current Penitentiary Department chiefs are working on this. You may have heard that [world chess ex-champion] Karpov played eight games in a pretrial jail last weekend and emerged safe and sound from this facility (laughs). Sports competitions and concerts for the inmates take place. This department and the Ministry of Justice are prepared to make the system more open. At the same time, let’s not forget that prisons are not health resorts. There should be a reasonable balance in this sphere.

Every year the number of people sentenced to life in prison increases by 300 or 400. What is the reason, and are there enough places to house these people?

There is nothing unusual about this. There was capital punishment in Ukraine until recently, and now these kinds of offenders are given a life setence. We are going to demand the allocation of budgetary funds for building or converting one of the existing prison camps into a maximum security facility that could admit as many lifers as possible. But don’t forget that people may be stripped of their freedom but not their dignity. Even in these conditions, they must have the right to correspondence, etc.

THE PRIME MINISTER STATED CLEARLY THAT WE WILL MERCILESSLY ROOT OUT CORRUPTION

On Feb. 1 President Yushchenko signed a decree on improving the anti-corruption policy in Ukraine and instructed the Ministry of Justice to implement it. It is clear what corruption in Ukraine is, but it is not clear where one should begin if this disgraceful phenomenon is a vicious circle.

Unless law-enforcement bodies bring to justice those who break the law, corruption will continue. The prime minister stated clearly that we will be mercilessly rooting out corruption. But the question is: are there law-enforcement bodies in Ukraine or not; and will they respond to such facts or not? On its part, the Ministry of Justice can introduce changes to the legislation, etc. I very much support the president’s initiatives concerning the transparency of tax accounting.

Do you think it’s necessary to establish a separate anti-corruption body?

My personal opinion is that it is not necessary. We must simply compel existing bodies, such as the prosecutor’s office, the police, and the security service to work, not to pretend to work.

I try to declare my income and pay taxes honestly, and my position as a citizen is protected. Here is an illustrative example. Late last year the magazine Focus published a list of what it believes are the 100 richest members of the Ukrainian parliament. I was named 19th and Akhmetov — 23rd. The rating was deduced on the basis of tax declarations. Unfortunately, this does not correspond to reality because people in this country are not used to paying taxes. I am saying this not because I am so rich or so poor, but because I am used to paying taxes honestly. After working as a diplomat in the United States for six years and in Europe for many years, I know that Ukraine will not advance without this. But people in our country, including officials, are not accustomed to paying taxes, declaring their true incomes and properties, and showing how much they paid for their expensive cars. If we force them to do this, I am sure there will be far less corruption in our country.

At one of the first cabinet meetings, Prime Minister Tymoshenko quoted Mr. Vinsky as saying that there is no Ministry of Transport and Communications in our country. This was a kind of compliment to Mykola Rudkovsky. Can you say anything good about your predecessors?

You know, the Ministry of Justice is very different from the other ministries in that it is an expert-oriented ministry, rather than a resource-oriented one. I began working at the ministry in the early 1990s, first as a rank-and-file consultant and then as a senior consultant, and I can see that many changes, including positive ones, have taken place since then. But I must say that we are definitely revising some things. I absolutely support the minister’s stand on the necessity of revising the performance of all self-financing businesses and executive departments, including the Penitentiary Department, because there are very many complaints about them, including accusations of corruption. The minister said we would not be reviewing notary public quotas so that nobody will suspect the ministry of being corrupt. We are prepared to regard the ministry’s previous administration as a sound-minded opponent. It is very important in this context because the truth is born out of a dispute. If they criticize us constructively, we will be reacting adequately, and I am convinced that we will be able to work effectively, transparently, and for the people’s benefit.

MEANWHILE

Viktor Yushchenko is demanding the dismissal of corrupt judges. The president announced this at a meeting with regional governors, when he addressed the question of public complaints about unlawful court decisions. Dishonest people, corruptionists, and frauds should be squeezed out of the judicial system, the guarantor of the Constitution said. According to the president, ordinary citizens most often complain about court rulings in their letters to him. Last year the president’s office received about 4,600 complaints of this kind, and 2,600 individuals have complained about the failure to obey court rulings.