Anti-corruption organizations and public activists have criticized presidential bill (No. 7440) on the High Anti-Corruption Court as not meeting the requirements of the Venice Commission and does not allow ensuring the independence of such proceedings.

"The Anti-Corruption Reform Group of the RRP [Reanimation reform package] and public activists-signatories urge the president of Ukraine to withdraw draft law No. 7440 and submit an updated one, which would take into account the aforementioned recommendations of the Venice Commission," a statement of a number of organizations, distributed by the Center for Combating Corruption, reads.

In particular, it is indicated that bill No. 7440 contradicts the main recommendation of the Venice Commission - it does not provide for the key role of international donors in the selection of anti-corruption judges. Experts nominated by international donors are given only an advisory role in the selection of judges. In fact, it is envisaged to create a new Public Council, similar to the Public Council of Integrity, as in a contest to the Supreme Court. "In contrast, the Venice Commission recommended to provide international organizations and donors with a decisive role in the process of selection of judges. Thus, the transparency of such selection appears questionable.," anti-corruption experts said.

The bill proposes to create a council of international experts. Nevertheless, the negative conclusions of this council will not oblige the High Qualification Commission of Judges to disqualify dubious candidates. Decisions of the Council of International Experts will be made by 11 members of the High Qualification Commission of Judges.

... International experts will be used only to legitimize the appointment of "necessary" judges, the signatories of the statement said.

In addition, according to experts, bill No. 7440 contradicts the recommendations of the Venice Commission in determining the jurisdiction of the court because the president suggests instructing the Anti-Corruption Court to consider a thousand cases not related to top corruption. Thus, the court will be overloaded with unrelated crimes and there will be no time or resource to concentrate on top corrupt officials.

Anticorruption activists also pay attention to the high requirements for candidates for the positions of judges, under which it will be practically impossible to form such a court.

"Article 8, part 4 provides for advisory role of the Public Council of international experts exclusively. Its negative conclusion on a certain candidate for the position of a judge can be ignored by the High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine – by 11 out of 16 votes of HQCJ members. In contrast, the Venice Commission recommended to provide international organizations and donors with a decisive role in the process of selection of judges. Thus, the transparency of such selection appears questionable," the statement concludes.

This statement was signed by the Anti-Corruption Reform group of the RRP, the Center for Combating Corruption, ACREC, Eidos Center for Political Studies and Analysis, StateWatch, Transparency International Ukraine, the Anti-Corruption Headquarters, the Center for Political and Legal Reforms and Automaidan activists.