Ukraine's court system: the Constitutional Court
by Roman Woronowycz
Kyiv Press Bureau
Today Ukraine's jurisprudence system is organized into three major courts: the Constitutional Court, which is responsible for issues involving the Constitution; the General Court of Competence, which deals with civil and criminal matters, and at the top of which stands the Supreme Court of Ukraine; and the Court of Specialization (commonly known as the arbitration court), which, basically, handles contractual conflicts and is overseen by the High Court of Arbitration.
In this installment we conclude our look at the Constitutional Court.
The court consists of 18 judges, 16 of whom already have been appointed. The judges are appointed by various sectors of the Ukrainian government. The president appoints six, the Verkhovna Rada six and the Supreme Court six. Today the court still is awaiting the appointment of the last two judges by the Verkhovna Rada, which has been stalled by political maneuverings.
This edited interview was conducted with Ivan Tymchenko, chairman of the Constitutional Court, who was appointed by President Leonid Kuchma and took his oath on October 18, 1996.
CONCLUSION
Q: Please give us a scenario of a typical day or week of work in the Constitutional Court.
A: As of right now I cannot tell you how a work day or a work week of the Constitutional Court may look.
Q: For example, the Supreme Court of the U.S. makes rulings on one day of the week ...
A: Yes, yes, I can say that we will have appointed days for meetings of the collegiums, days of plenary sessions of the whole Constitutional Court, at which time we will address the submissions and petitions to the court.
At general sessions we will handle court matters.
But no, we haven't yet established our daily routines. We are now reviewing our cases and then will set the agenda.
I can tell you that the judges have three months to review submissions to the court (by citizens) and six months to review petitions (from government bodies) after they are presented to the plenary body.
It may take us two months, maybe a month or two weeks, depending on how complicated the case is, to review the matter in the collegiums. The collegium decides whether the case has merit and ought to be brought before the plenary body. If it is deemed worthy, the secretary of the collegium then requests that the chairman put it on the agenda of the court. The court then has three months or six months, depending on the case, to decide the matter from the day it is submitted. Until that moment our time is not limited. We can take a month or two, or a week to decide whether the matter should go further.
Q: What are some of the cases that the Court will be looking at in its first session?
A: There is a petition from 100 deputies of the Verkhovna Rada to review the constitutionality of the ban on the Communist Party as decreed by the Presidium of the Verkhovna Rada in September 1991.
There is a petition by more than 45 deputies to decide on the constitutionality of a ban on holding a second government position while a member of the Verkhovna Rada.
We also have a petition from the president to review some of the laws passed by the Verkhovna Rada of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea on their constitutionality.
There also are many submissions by citizens on the interpretations of laws and the Constitution by government bodies, which have already been assigned to the judges.
Q: Is there any interaction between the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court?
A: If during a criminal or a civil case, a question is raised about the constitutional merits of the proceeding or on constitutional rights, it should be elevated to the plenum of the Supreme Court, whether at the time the matter is before a district court, a city court, an oblast court or the Supreme Court.
The plenum has the responsibility to decide whether a constitutional question does exist in the case. If the plenum determines that some doubt exists as to the constitutionality of the case or the ruling law and its effect on the citizen, whether in a criminal or civil procedure, then the plenum of the Supreme Court suspends the process and refers the matter to the Constitutional Court.
The Constitutional Court must then take the case and address it without delay.
Q: Could you please give us a description of the organizational structure of the Constitutional Court, its departments and today's budget, as well as the planned budget for 1997?
A: The law on the Constitution foresees a structure that involves a secretariat of the Constitutional Court, a library, archives and a publication, which will be the newspaper of the Constitutional Court.
The secretariat, which is the administrative body of the Constitutional Court, is the service of the head of the Constitutional Court and includes the advisors to the head, among them a senior advisor and three assistant advisors.
The other members of the Constitutional Court have an academic consultant and an assistant (clerk). This is how the law on the court has structured it. Right now we will follow that outline. As we gain experience, we could make changes; maybe we will need a larger administrative structure, maybe the individual judges will need more consultants. This will be decided during the course of our work. If changes are needed, then we will prepare an appropriate draft law.
The secretariat is led by the director who is appointed by the court judges. He has two assistants, one in legal matters, who will head the department of legal experts, and the other one in administrative affairs.
The initial work of the court was to organize the various submissions and petitions to the Constitutional Court and also the many mailed items we receive. We have established a department of document control [within the secretariat], which includes two sub-departments, the bureau of documents and the bureau of control.
The service will have the responsibility of tracking the various documents from the time we receive them until final decisions on court cases are made.
Another major area of our work will fall under the department of legal experts. This is a unit of the secretariat that will recommend whether the questions posed before the court merit Constitutional review or whether the applications should be declined. Only lawyers will work here.
There is also the press service of the constitutional Court.
Also important is the department of registration and systematization of laws. It will maintain documentation control over all the laws and resolutions passed by the Verkhovna Rada; acts of the Cabinet of Ministers; presidential decrees. They will be stored in bound texts and on computers.
The library of the Constitutional Court is also very important to us. We have great hope that it will be useful to all the judges, the academic consultants, the judges' aides and the legal experts.
We had hoped that we would have our own place and library. But, for now, we are starting at point zero.
We recently obtained a 60-volume set of the rulings of the German Supreme Court since 1951 with attached commentaries and translations into Ukrainian. For today, that is all our resources allow us to obtain.
There is a department of external affairs that consists of four individuals.
We have a publishing department. This will include the newspaper of the Constitutional Court and the editorial arm. What is generally called the printing department we are calling the computer graphics department because we hope computers will do most of the work.
There is also a department that is responsible for the maintenance of property and the building of the Constitutional Court.
Q: Are there plans to move the Constitutional Court to its own building? Today the building in which the Constitutional Court resides is within the domain of the Cabinet of Ministers. The chairman of the Verkhovna Rada, speaking at a January 24, press conference, said the court was more than welcome to use one of its buildings.
A: We were given this building (next door to the presidential administration building) as temporary housing by the president on November 2, 1996.
A permanent home was authorized at 14 Zhuliansky St. It will be a very becoming residence, but right now it is merely a carcass. It needs complete restoration inside and out. All that really exists is the structure and exterior facade.
It will not be owned by us. The owners of all public property are the people. But it will be the permanent residence of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine.
It will be our building in the same manner that the Verkhovna Rada's is theirs, the president's is his and the Cabinet of Minister's is theirs. But it is all government property.
But specifically, what is the situation of our temporary housing here? Now I speak, not as a member of the Constitutional Court, but as its administrative head who must decide administrative matters.
At the time we were deciding to lease this building and making other decisions, I was concerned about the legal aspect of the matter. When any person puts together a contract, they want to make sure it is done legally.
This building at one time was used for apartments. The people were transferred to other buildings when the government (under the Soviet regime) decided to transform it into administrative offices.
As they did so, independence occurred. The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine ruled that all the property of the Central Committee of the Communist Party now belonged to it. It had to be placed under some ruling body. The property of the city was placed with the City Council of Kyiv. Raion property was placed with the raion administration. However, all the state property remained with the Verkhovna Rada.
This was done differently here than in other republics. For the most part, the property of the central committees of the republics was turned over to the individual governments, which decided who should get what. The Verkhovna Rada did not do this.
It took the property under its jurisdiction and did not parcel it out. When the administrative structure of the President's Office was formed, the issue of a residence came up, and the Verkhovna Rada gave them the building in which they are currently housed. That is all they were given.
The same thing with the Cabinet of Ministers. They only have the one building.
With the enactment of the Constitution, the Cabinet of Ministers was given authority over state property. They dealt out property to the Verkhovna Rada, to the presidential administration. They left for themselves only one other building, the one here.
The law on the Constitutional Court gave the Cabinet of Ministers the responsibility to ensure housing for the court, a separate building. They gave up this building in which we are currently housed, the only other building under their jurisdiction - and only after a four-month battle with the Verkhovna Rada over landlord rights. The Verkhovna Rada did not give the building up willingly, but only after a decree was issued by the Cabinet of Ministers.
The Verkhovna Rada could have turned to the president to veto the decree, but it did not. Instead, it turned to the arbitration court for a ruling, but only after the Cabinet of Ministers already had given us the building.
But we signed the lease based on the declarations of the Cabinet of Ministers and the president.
Q: What is the budget of the Constitutional Court?
A: By the law, until January 1, 1997, we were financed under the budget of the Verkhovna Rada. The Cabinet of Ministers reserve fund is obliged to reimburse the Verkhovna Rada for those outlays.
As for the 1997 budget, as you know it is not yet approved, but we have already received money from the Cabinet of Ministers for the purchase of furniture, computers, office technology, copy machines, pens and so on.
We received 400,000 hrv in January and will receive another outlay in February. These are advances on what will be appropriated when the budget is approved.
We are also sufficiently funded for the employees that we will hire. By the end of the first quarter we hope to have hired 80 individuals, to extend that to 110 by the end of the second quarter, 160 by the third quarter and then to hire another 200 workers at the end of the year.
We also have been given funds for the reconstruction of the premises at 14 Zhuliansky St. In the first quarter we received 1 million hrv. For the second quarter we have 3 million hrv.
We expect to complete construction and be in the new building by the end of the year, even as soon as November 1.
Q: So then, what about the rumors that the Constitutional Court could end up in Kharkiv?
A: The Constitutional Court has had nothing to do with that. It is in no way involved or at fault. It has made no decision and, therefore, cannot be judged. This is a matter that arose as a result of the haggling that took place over this building.
Q: So what or who is the source of the rumor?
A: It is not a rumor. The issue has been put on the agenda of the Verkhovna Rada for February. I am not going to give a legal point of view on the matter, we will wait to see what happens, but all this began with the deputies of the Verkhovna Rada. The Kharkiv deputies initiated the motion. But it is understood that some people do not want the Constitutional Court to be in Kyiv.
Q: Who are they?
A: Let's just say those who want problems for our country. But I am sure the Constitutional Court will remain in Kyiv.
Copyright © The Ukrainian Weekly, March 2, 1997, No. 9, Vol. LXV
| Home Page |