Is Ukraine’s EU path at risk? Internal resistance threatens judicial reforms

When Ukraine gained EU candidate status in 2022, the country committed to overhaul the Constitutional Court’s judge selection process. In an article with European Pravda, Mykhailo Zhernakov and Kateryna Shevchuk from the DEJURE Foundation warn that the stalled process carries risks.

In 2020, Ukraine faced a near-crisis when its Constitutional Court, influenced by pro-Russian and oligarch-linked figures, tried to dismantle electronic asset declarations, a cornerstone of anti-corruption efforts, and challenged language and land reforms. Public protests and sharp criticism from the EU’s Venice Commission, which accused the court of overstepping its role, forced a pause. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy considered drastic measures, like suspending the court, but opted instead for reform – a move tied to Ukraine’s EU aspirations. Today, however, these reforms are faltering, with internal actors in Kyiv blocking progress, kindling fears that Ukraine’s path to EU integration is veering off course.

When Ukraine gained EU candidate status in 2022, it committed to seven conditions, with judicial reform at the forefront. A key promise was to overhaul the Constitutional Court’s judge selection process, replacing opaque, politically driven appointments with a transparent, competitive system overseen by an independent Advisory Group of Experts (AGE), including international specialists. In 2024, this process yielded two independent judges, Alla Oliynyk and Serhiy Riznyk, raising hopes for a reformed court.

But since February 2025, when the AGE submitted new candidate lists to parliament and Zelenskyy, no further appointments have been made. With three judges’ terms expiring in January 2025, the court now lacks a quorum – 11 judges instead of the required 12 – paralysing its ability to rule on critical issues like martial law, elections, or potential peace agreements with Russia. Observers suggest the delay stems from resistance to candidates deemed “too independent” by those favouring control over the judiciary.

The second EU condition, reforming the High Council of Justice (HCJ) and High Qualification Commission of Judges (HQCJ) – bodies responsible for appointing and disciplining judges – has also hit roadblocks. Starting in 2021, these institutions saw progress, with international experts ensuring ethical selections, leading to the dismissal of 50 unfit judges since November 2023, including notorious figures tied to past scandals. Yet, as the HQCJ began scrutinizing Kyiv’s controversial Pechersk and Administrative Courts, the State Bureau of Investigation launched criminal probes against its members, raising suspicions of political interference.

Worse, a bill led by lawmaker Denys Maslov threatens to gut disciplinary measures, shielding corrupt judges. With international experts’ mandates expiring in June 2025, there’s a risk that future selections will fall to compromised bodies like the Council of Judges, led by figures linked to discredited elites, undermining the judiciary’s integrity.

The Supreme Court, plagued by corruption and judges with questionable loyalties, remains another sore point. The European Commission’s 2023 and 2024 reports urged reform, but a May 2025 bill proposes a superficial integrity check, ignoring past misconduct and offering a veneer of progress. This “simulation” of reform, enabled by vague EU guidelines, frustrates genuine change. Without robust international oversight, the court risks perpetuating a system reminiscent of the pre-2014 Yanukovych era, when political loyalists dominated.

These setbacks threaten Ukraine’s EU candidacy, as judicial independence is a non-negotiable condition for accession. The EU, while granting flexibility, expects results, and failure to deliver could prompt vetoes from member states like the Netherlands or Hungary, already sceptical of Ukraine joining the EU. For non-Ukrainian audiences, this signals a broader challenge: internal sabotage, possibly by oligarchs or pro-Russian factions, could derail Ukraine’s European dream, weakening its democratic resilience amid Russia’s ongoing war.

To salvage progress, the EU must set precise requirements: maintain international experts in selection processes, mandate immediate Constitutional Court appointments, and enforce a rigorous Supreme Court overhaul. Ukraine’s authorities, meanwhile, must resist backsliding, recognising that a functional judiciary is vital not just for EU integration but for domestic stability, especially as peace talks loom. Time is short, and without decisive action, Ukraine risks squandering the trust and progress earned since 2022.

A longer version of this article was published in Ukrainian with European Pravda.

Caption: Archive photo. A protester kicks a placard with combo portrait depicturing faces of the President Poroshenko and former President Yanukovich with a slogan ‘No to elections with Yanukovich law’ during their rally near the Parliament building in Kiev, Ukraine, 6 September 2018. Protestors demand the Ukrainian Parliament accept new election laws and stop the possibility of being elected for money. [EPA-EFE/SERGEY DOLZHENKO]

Updated: June 2, 2025 - 08:13