1. Root Causes of the Non-Enforcement of the Domestic Judicial Decisions in Ukraine
- Author:
- Alla Chernova, Halyna Balanovych, and Hanna Pashkova
- Publication Date:
- 12-2019
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- National Security and Defence
- Institution:
- Razumkov Centre
- Abstract:
- The study was carried out based on the “Methodology for international and/or national expert analysis to determine the main reasons for the non-enforcement of decisions rendered by the domestic courts of Ukraine” within the Council of Europe’s project “Supporting Ukraine in the execution of judgements of the European Court of Human Rights”. This study was particularly related to the devastatingly low levels of the enforcement of judgments and, accordingly, the need to improve the situation in this area. The project implementation revealed the root causes of the non-enforcement of three categories of court decisions (social disputes, labour disputes and decisions concerning legal entities falling under the responsibility of the State or the State itself), as well as other problems linked to the statistics and the register of court decisions The first problem was associated with the impossibility of finding necessary cases. The experts identified systemic flaws in record-keeping and data comparability of the Unified State Register of Court Decisions (USRCD) and the Unified State Register of the Enforcement Proceedings with respect to all these categories of judgments. For example, of 2,760 court decisions in “social disputes” selected for analysis, the experts could only find 2,254 judgements in the USRCD under the provided requisites. The analysis revealed systemic violations of the relevant legislation, such as illegal reduction of payments, significant narrowing of the scope of plaintiffs’ rights by bylaws, misapplication of the budget legislation by the authorised government bodies. Speaking of labour disputes, the analysis covered 1,505 unexecuted court decisions. Causes for the non-enforcement in this category of decisions included the lack of necessary state funding (lack of budgetary allocations) at the time of the matter of controversy leading to the state’s failure to fulfil its obligations, improper exercise of powers by government authorities and state-owned enterprises, flaws in normative regulation of labour relationships, repeated reorganisations of one and the same enterprises leading to the interpretation confusion of these procedures and their improper execution. As for the decisions concerning legal entities falling under the responsibility of the State or the State itself, 250 of 14,324 court decisions of this category were subjected to expert analysis. It revealed inefficiency of the State Execution Service in recovering such debts, the improper performance of duties by the public executors, unlawful assistance to the debtor or delays in the enforcement of court decisions, obstruction of the plaintiffs’ right to use the mechanisms stipulated by the Law “On State Guarantees for the Enforcement of Judgements”. The study has also analysed the national legislation governing the system of bodies and the procedure for enforcement of judgments. Therefore, if taken into consideration by the relevant authorities, the project results presented in this publication can contribute to the understanding of current situation with the enforcement of judgements and developing approaches to their better execution.
- Topic:
- Labor Issues, Courts, Judiciary, and European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)
- Political Geography:
- Europe and Ukraine