These and other questions were raised at the next meeting of the press club, whose guests were the head of the Appellate Court of Volyn Oblast Petro Todosiiovych Filiuk, the head of the Volyn Oblast Department of Justice Vasyl Teodorovych Hubyk, and the head of the NGO "Foundation for European Integration" Mykola Serhiiovych Nikitiuk.
"Today in Ukrainian society there is an undisguised distrust of the authorities, of state institutions – the court, the prosecutor's office, the police," asserts Mykola Nikitiuk. According to the results of a sociological survey conducted by public organizations in the city of Lutsk, regarding who protects citizens' rights, out of 100 respondents: 2% – police, 3% – prosecutor's office, 10% – authorities, 16% – court, 60% – public organizations. According to the results of the same survey, only every fifth person who has had dealings in courts can say that they trust the court and that their case was resolved in accordance with current legislation. Instead, the court and education, believes Mr. Mykola, are the two main spheres, by paying attention to which society can count on the revival of European values.
"The judicial reform has not taken place in the state. Today courts do not become an obstacle in criminal business involving illegal customs clearance of cars, illegal deprivation of citizens' housing, illegal (not in the interests of society) privatization. Society has given judges great privileges, and at the same time we do not know the mechanism of influence on those who are not worthy to be a judge," noted Mykola Nikitiuk.
Is society satisfied with the professional training and moral qualities of judges? How can the community influence judges who take bribes or abuse alcohol? Why do collectives of judges not respond appropriately to those who disgrace the high title of judge? Has the practice of appointing judges justified itself? Should we not return to their election by the citizens themselves? Why are the requirements of the Constitution of Ukraine regarding the introduction of the institution of people's assessors (in the context of judicial reform) not being fulfilled? The Law of Ukraine "On the Judiciary" provides that people's assessors are elected by courts and approved by city authorities. Can such people's assessors fully express the interests of society? By whom should people's assessors be selected? According to the Law of Ukraine "On the Status of Judges," judges take an oath before the President of Ukraine, who may be elected by less than half of Ukraine's population. Is this correct? What does the experience of past years show? Where should a judge who assumes the position of judge take the oath? These questions were heard rhetorically throughout the entire meeting.
"I came to hear the problem and take into account the opinions expressed at the press club," assured Petro Filiuk, who had to hear rather sharp accusations from those present against judges regarding their criminal actions. He agreed with the criticism and did not deny the existence of corrupt practices in courts, but categorically stated that he would not allow "casting a shadow on all who work in courts," since the vast majority of them are honest, decent, principled and qualified specialists. "No one is born a judge. The main thing is what kind of person you are," noted Petro Todosiiovych. Today there is no single body that would handle the selection of judges. This is partly done by the Appellate Court, which for a certain time monitors the work of a judge's assistant, after which it prepares the relevant documents and conducts a discussion at a meeting of the Presidium. "At the level of Volyn Oblast we will not be able to fundamentally change the judiciary; it is necessary to start at the state level," assured Petro Filiuk and added that he is always ready to listen to citizens and provide assistance within his competence.
Active participation in the discussion of the issue was taken by the head of the Volyn Oblast public organization "Children of War" Rostyslav Chapiuk, the head of the Volyn Oblast public organization "Ukrainian Choice" Ivan Bratchenia, the village head of the Zvyniachynska village council Volodymyr Palchyk, and the lawyer of the NGO "Volyn Perspectives" Ivan Mysiuk. In particular, Ivan Mysiuk, who worked for many years in investigative bodies and as a judge of a city court, emphasized the lack of courage among judges to bring a case to completion, because they fear conflict with the prosecutor's office. Throughout the world there are thousands of cases of illegal court decisions, but for this there exists a procedure for protection and appeals.
Particularly sharp were the speeches of those who themselves suffered from illegal judicial actions – Volodymyr Havryliuk and Lutsk resident Yurii Popov, who, with the help of Roma, was to be illegally deprived of his housing, and only thanks to the intervention of public organizations was it possible to resolve the case positively.
Proposals of the round table participants: 1. Adopt a Law on the election of judges by the citizens of the state, and not by representatives of one or two parties that will be in parliament. Judges should be elected by the people, not by the authorities. Among the authorities there are very many persons who do not respect the Constitution, laws, or the rights of Ukrainians. Practice shows that the authorities in the vast majority violate the rights of citizens more than citizens violate the rights of the authorities.
2. By the Law "On the Status of Judges" determine that judges take an oath before the people of Ukraine – the community where they will work. Possibly at a meeting of representatives.
3. Immediately introduce the institution of people's assessors and jurors. Change the procedure for their election. They should be selected and recommended not by courts, but by public organizations and labor collectives.
4. Amend the Law of Ukraine "On the Judiciary"
4.1. Art. 14, para. 6. add "which he must indicate in his decision"
4.2. Art. 102, para. 2 should read: ensuring that judges fulfill the Judge's Oath, establishing the authority, honor and dignity of a judge.
5. Elect representatives of territorial communities to the qualification commissions of judges.
6. Create a Public Committee for the Protection of Constitutional Rights.