The Constitutional Court of Ukraine opened proceedings regarding unconstitutionality of the provisions on e-declaration requirement for anti-corruption activists. Respective constitutional appeal was initiated and prepared by Reanimation Package of Reforms.

Earlier, the same appeal was filed with the Constitutional Court by Ukraine’s ombudsman Liudmyla Denisova. As of now, two submissions have been joined together into one proceeding.  According to Yuliia Kyrychenko, member of the RPR Board and a manager of constitutional law projects at the Centre of Policy and Legal Reform, this indicates that the Constitutional Court considers the grounds for both appeals to be appropriate.

“We are grateful to the authorities who hold the right to submit constitutional appeals to the Constitutional Court, namely ombudsman Liudmyla Denisova and 65 MPs for their support and appeals to the Constitutional Court. The opening of the proceedings and uniting the appeals at this stage of the case suggest that the Constitutional Court considers substantiation of unconstitutionality in the respective appeals to be appropriate and sees it necessary to investigate this issue within the Grand Chamber. The proceedings were initiated without any delay; this is our first victory on the way to abolishing unconstitutional e-declaration for activists. We are waiting for the decision of the Court before the next round of declarations submission, that is by the spring of 2019,” said Kyrychenko.

On July 20, 2018, MPs, representatives of Reanimation Package of Reforms and the Coalition for the Protection of the Civil Society in Ukraine submitted for the Court’s consideration the above said constitutional appeal signed by 65 MPs per RPR request.

As noted earlier by the experts, declaration for civil society activists violates at least three provisions of the Constitution. First, it contradicts the principle of the rule of law in terms of legal certainty and legitimate purpose. Second, the declaration requirement is a direct limitation on the freedom of association guaranteed by the Basic Law. Third, this is an interference with the private life of civic activists who are not individuals authorized to perform state functions and therefore are not required to submit declarations the way officials, judges and prosecutors are.