Until and including 6 August, candidates may submit their applications via the Judicial Career Portal on the website of the High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine (HQCJ) to participate in the competition for the position of judge of the High Anti-Corruption Court. This is an opportunity for legal professionals, including lawyers, judges, and academics, to take part in an improved, more transparent selection process for a seat on the HACC bench.
During the previous competition, 23 vacancies at HACC and the HACC Appeals Chamber remained unfilled due to procedural flaws and other issues. This time, the HQCJ and Parliament have addressed those shortcomings and enhanced the selection rules.
We hope these changes will make it easier for professional and virtuous candidates to apply and compete.
What has changed and how?
1) The minimum passing score for the IQ and Ukrainian statehood history tests may now be set by the HQCJ at below 75%.
Previously: The threshold for the IQ and Ukrainian statehood history tests could not be lower than 75%.
2) A single competition will now be held for both HACC and its Appeals Chamber. Candidates can apply for both simultaneously; those with the highest scores will become judges of the Appeals Chamber.
Previously: Competitions for the first and appellate instances were held separately, and candidates had to choose in advance which level to apply for.
3) Candidates who were not selected in the previous competition are now eligible to reapply.
Previously: Candidates who failed to qualify were barred from participating in any other judicial competition for one year.
The expansion of HACC’s jurisdiction and the increasing number of cases referred to by the NABU and the SAPO have placed a heavy burden on the court’s current judges. There is therefore an urgent need to reinforce the judiciary with new, professional, and ethical members. This would positively impact on the efficiency of handling NABU and SAPO cases.
One of the most criticized aspects of the previous competition was the practical assignment stage, particularly the lack of transparency in the evaluation process — it was unclear which evaluator gave which score and based on what criteria.
Civil society also pointed out that candidates’ written assignments were not made publicly available. For this reason, expectations are high that the HQCJ will not only ensure independent evaluation, but also transparent assessment of the practical tasks.
Although the new rules do not eliminate all previous shortcomings, they already create better conditions for both first-time applicants and those seeking another chance to join the HACC bench.
