The issue of reforming the justice system in Ukraine is most often perceived through the prism of judges, courts, and the integrity of the judiciary. However, this matter is so comprehensive that many of its important aspects do not always receive due attention.

One such aspect is the management dimension - namely, the effectiveness of judicial governance and self-governance bodies.

The current system of these bodies is fairly complex and consists of six key elements:

• The Congress of Judges of Ukraine
• The Council of Judges of Ukraine, elected by the Congress
• The High Council of Justice (HJC), 10 members of which are elected by the Congress of Judges
• The High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine (HQCJ), whose members are appointed by the HJC through a competitive selection process
• The State Judicial Administration (SJA), which is accountable to the HJC
• The National School of Judges of Ukraine (NSJU), established under the HQCJ.

At the same time, there are a number of structures whose activities address specific, primarily personnel-related, aspects of the functioning of Ukraine’s justice system (e.g., the Ethical Council, competition commissions, etc.). However, these bodies operate on an ad hoc basis, and it is hardly appropriate to regard them as integral elements of the system of judicial governance and self-government in Ukraine.

This system emerged through a long process of reforms and was consolidated following the judicial reform and constitutional amendments of 2016. Its development was shaped by prevailing circumstances and events, including changes introduced during the presidency of Viktor Yanukovych aimed at strengthening political control over the judiciary, the events of the Revolution of Dignity, and subsequent measures designed to cleanse the judiciary and combat corruption.

As a result, a rather complex system of judicial governance and self-government has taken shape. Yet, this system has not always proved capable of responding adequately to the current challenges facing Ukraine’s justice sector. In many cases, issues such as dependence on political power, insufficient institutional capacity, duplication of functions, and overlapping competences are evident.

These shortcomings, and the urgency of addressing them, have long been debated within the expert community. In particular, for political reasons, the HQCJ and the High Council of Justice were unable to function for an extended period due to the absence of duly appointed members. Questions have also arisen regarding the duplication of functions in judicial appointments by these bodies, the effectiveness of the State Judicial Administration, and the overlap of its competences with those of the High Council of Justice.

Resolving these and related issues is not only a key component of Ukraine’s broader judicial reform but also an essential step in the country’s process of European integration. Relevant priorities are reflected in the Roadmap on the Rule of Law, approved by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine on May 14, 2025, which sets out the principal reforms required for accession to the European Union.

Section 1.1 (“Main Reforms”) of the Roadmap includes subsection (c): “Strengthening the institutional capacity of judicial governance and self-government bodies, other justice system institutions, as well as prosecutorial self-government bodies.” The benchmarks identified therein outline the key reform priorities in this area, including:

• optimization of the activities and competences of judicial governance and self-government bodies;
• clarification of their status and delimitation of functions;
• ensuring the independence and continuous functioning of judicial governance bodies and the State Judicial Administration.

To achieve these goals, seven key measures are envisaged, scheduled for implementation between the fourth quarter of 2025 and the fourth quarter of 2027. The most significant of these include:

• Conducting an audit of the activities of judicial governance and self-government bodies, accompanied by recommendations for eliminating duplication of powers, clarifying competences, and improving their status and procedures.
• Drafting and adopting legislation aimed at strengthening the status of judicial governance and self-government bodies, clearly delineating their competences, and, if necessary, reorganizing them.

In practice, this reform package will primarily affect the HQCJ and the High Council of Justice, addressing the duplication and overlap of their functions. The possibility of reorganization - including their potential unification into a single body - has been discussed in the expert community for some time.

Three measures are directed specifically at improving the status and operations of the State Judicial Administration (SJA):

• conducting a comprehensive audit of the Administration’s activities and preparing recommendations to eliminate duplication and optimize its structure and functions;
• adopting a law to enhance the status and activities of the SJA based on the results of the audit;
• organizing a transparent competition to select the Head of the SJA.

With regard to the Congress of Judges of Ukraine, it is planned to develop and adopt legislation allowing the Congress to be held online when circumstances prevent an in-person format.

In addition, a general measure is foreseen to increase the transparency and quality of selection processes for candidates to judicial governance and self-government bodies.

Taken together, the goals and measures set out in the Roadmap on the Rule of Law address most of the systemic problems in judicial governance and self-government, including:

• enhancing the efficiency of selecting candidates for elected positions and ensuring the continuity of institutional functioning;
• overcoming duplication of competences (HQCJ/High Council of Justice; High Council of Justice/SJA);
• carrying out a functional audit of the SJA and optimizing its structure and activities;
• improving the procedures of the Congress of Judges by introducing an online format that could broaden participation;
• implementing necessary legislative amendments to consolidate these reforms.

To achieve these goals, seven key measures are envisaged, scheduled for implementation between the fourth quarter of 2025 and the fourth quarter of 2027. The most significant of these include:

• Conducting an audit of the activities of judicial governance and self-government bodies, accompanied by recommendations for eliminating duplication of powers, clarifying competences, and improving their status and procedures.
• Drafting and adopting legislation aimed at strengthening the status of judicial governance and self-government bodies, clearly delineating their competences, and, if necessary, reorganizing them.

In practice, this reform package will primarily affect the HQCJ and the High Council of Justice, addressing the duplication and overlap of their functions. The possibility of reorganization - including their potential unification into a single body - has been discussed in the expert community for some time.

Three measures are directed specifically at improving the status and operations of the State Judicial Administration (SJA):

• conducting a comprehensive audit of the Administration’s activities and preparing recommendations to eliminate duplication and optimize its structure and functions;
• adopting a law to enhance the status and activities of the SJA based on the results of the audit;
• organizing a transparent competition to select the Head of the SJA.

With regard to the Congress of Judges of Ukraine, it is planned to develop and adopt legislation allowing the Congress to be held online when circumstances prevent an in-person format.

In addition, a general measure is foreseen to increase the transparency and quality of selection processes for candidates to judicial governance and self-government bodies.

Taken together, the goals and measures set out in the Roadmap on the Rule of Law address most of the systemic problems in judicial governance and self-government, including:

• enhancing the efficiency of selecting candidates for elected positions and ensuring the continuity of institutional functioning;
• overcoming duplication of competences (HQCJ/High Council of Justice; High Council of Justice/SJA);
• carrying out a functional audit of the SJA and optimizing its structure and activities;
• improving the procedures of the Congress of Judges by introducing an online format that could broaden participation;
• implementing necessary legislative amendments to consolidate these reforms.