Articles for author: Andrii Nekoliak

The Diversity of Legal Governance of Memory in Europe

Memory laws pose a set of distinct challenges for modern democracies, including in the realm of human rights law. In the four reports, conducted during the MEMOCRACY project, we took stock of the dynamics, trade-offs, and the effects of legal governance of historical memory in a region ridden with mnemonic conflicts. This contribution distils the most interesting comparative findings of the reports, namely the fact that the countries’ own and foreign experiences with totalitarianism are legally and politically approached very differently. On this basis, we sketch the consequences and challenges of these fundamental differences, both for the establishment of a “European memory” and the various states’ approaches to modern geopolitics.

Wartime Constitutionalism and the Politics of Constitutional Review in Ukraine

On 18 July 2024, Ukraine’s Constitutional Court issued a decision concerning the rights of the accused in criminal proceedings under martial law. The extension of detention, the Court ruled, can only be issued based on a reasoned court decision—this applies even in times of war. In this blogpost, we examine how the war has influenced the ways in which various actors engage with constitutional complaints, before discussing the Constitutional Court's recent decision on Article 615.6 of the Criminal Procedure Code. We argue that this ruling exemplifies how the Constitutional Court can maintain the relevance and practical significance of its decision-making in wartime.

A Damaged Court Causing a Constitutional Crisis

In late October 2020, Ukraine’s Constitutional Court found major elements of Ukraine’s legal framework on combatting corruption unconstitutional. The decision was met with so much backlash that the rule of law in Ukraine is now at stake. Additionally, it has caused a deep rift within the Constitutional Court itself, which is currently unable to take decisions as a number of justices refuse to participate in proceedings. The decision has thus not only undermined the ongoing efforts to fight corruption but has thrown Ukraine into a veritable constitutional crisis.

Ukraine’s Presidents and the Judiciary: An Uneasy Relationship

On March 11, 2020, Ukraine’s Constitutional Court issued a decision dealing with the judicial reform of President Volodymyr Zelensky. The Court cooled down the reformist zeal of the presidential office by proclaiming major changes to the legislation on the judiciary unconstitutional. The Court’s decision strengthens judicial independence in Ukraine which is tainted with the legacy of politicization of past presidencies.