{"id":19482,"date":"2026-09-05T10:30:09","date_gmt":"2026-09-05T07:30:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2026\/09\/draft-law-on-amendments-to-the-civil-procedure-code-of-ukraine-and-the-code-of-administrative-procedure-of-ukraine-regarding-the-improvement-of-the-procedure-for-case-consideration-by-the-high-anti-co\/"},"modified":"2026-09-05T10:30:09","modified_gmt":"2026-09-05T07:30:09","slug":"draft-law-on-amendments-to-the-civil-procedure-code-of-ukraine-and-the-code-of-administrative-procedure-of-ukraine-regarding-the-improvement-of-the-procedure-for-case-consideration-by-the-high-anti-co","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2026\/09\/draft-law-on-amendments-to-the-civil-procedure-code-of-ukraine-and-the-code-of-administrative-procedure-of-ukraine-regarding-the-improvement-of-the-procedure-for-case-consideration-by-the-high-anti-co\/","title":{"rendered":"Draft Law on Amendments to the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine and the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine regarding the improvement of the procedure for case consideration by the High Anti-Corruption Court"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Analysis of the Draft Law:<\/p>\n<h3>Analysis of the Draft Law on Improving the Procedure for Consideration of Cases by the High Anti-Corruption Court<\/h3>\n<p>This draft law is aimed at optimizing the procedural activities of the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) by changing the principle of forming the composition of the court when considering certain categories of cases. The main idea consists of transitioning from the mandatory collegiate consideration of cases concerning civil asset forfeiture to a single-judge consideration, unless the defendant expresses a desire to engage a panel. The draft law also unifies the approaches to considering cases on the application of sanctions within the scope of the Code of Administrative Judiciary of Ukraine. These changes are expected to significantly accelerate the consideration of cases that hold high public significance.<\/p>\n<h4>Structure and Main Provisions<\/h4>\n<p>The document introduces targeted but fundamental changes to the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) and the Code of Administrative Judiciary (CAJ) of Ukraine:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Change in the Composition of the Court:<\/strong> Instead of an alternative-free panel of three judges, cases concerning unjustified assets will, by default, be considered by a single judge. Collegiate consideration becomes an &#8220;option&#8221; that the defendant has the right to initiate upon their own motion.<\/li>\n<li><strong>List of Subjects:<\/strong> The draft law clearly defines an exhaustive list of high-ranking officials (from the President to the chairs of higher specialized courts) who have the right to petition for collegiate consideration.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Procedural Filters:<\/strong> A clear time deadline for submitting a motion for collegiate consideration has been established \u2014 this must be done before the case is scheduled for hearing on the merits.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Administrative Judiciary:<\/strong> The imperative provision on the mandatory collegiate consideration of cases on the application of sanctions is excluded from Article 283-1 of the CAJ, which removes obstacles to the more rapid resolution of such matters by a single judge.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4>Key Aspects for Experts and Business<\/h4>\n<p>For the professional community and citizens, the following points are the most important:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Procedural Speed:<\/strong> The transition to single-judge consideration significantly eases the schedules of HACC judges, which reduces the risk of delaying judicial proceedings due to the logistical difficulties of assembling a panel.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Right to Defense:<\/strong> Maintaining the possibility of collegiate consideration upon the defendant&#8217;s motion is an important guarantee for officials whose assets are the subject of a dispute. This ensures a balance between the speed of justice and the requirement for enhanced judicial oversight in high-complexity cases.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Procedural Stability:<\/strong> Introducing an obligation for the court to clarify to the defendant their right to collegiate consideration directly in the ruling on the opening of proceedings minimizes the risks of abuse and ensures legal certainty for both parties to the process.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Elimination of Conflicts:<\/strong> Removing mentions of collegiate consideration in sanction cases within the CAJ harmonizes legislation, allowing courts to act more effectively under conditions of strict time limits (30 days).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Analysis of the Explanatory Note:<\/p>\n<p>Greetings. As a lawyer with many years of experience, I have analyzed the provided document. Here is a detailed overview of the substance and consequences of this draft law.<\/p>\n<h3>1. Substance of the Draft Law<\/h3>\n<p>The draft law is aimed at optimizing the work of the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) through a transition from mandatory collegiate consideration to single-judge consideration of certain categories of civil and administrative cases. Specifically, it concerns cases regarding the forfeiture of unjustified assets and the application of sanctions, which will allow the court to approach judge workloads more flexibly.<\/p>\n<h3>2. Reasons and Necessity for Adoption<\/h3>\n<p>The author of the explanatory note highlights three key reasons:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Excessive Workload:<\/strong> Statistics indicate a constant increase in the number of pending criminal proceedings at the HACC. Collegiate consideration (a panel of three judges) for even relatively uncomplicated civil and administrative cases significantly slows down the process and depletes the court&#8217;s resources.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Violation of Timelines:<\/strong> The need to form panels leads to delays in case consideration, which contradicts the principle of &#8220;reasonable timeframes&#8221; (Art. 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights). This is particularly critical for sanction cases, which are urgent by nature.<\/li>\n<li><strong>European Integration Commitments:<\/strong> The reform is part of the Roadmap on the Rule of Law and complies with European Commission recommendations regarding increasing the effectiveness of anti-corruption efforts and ensuring dynamic case consideration.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3>3. Main Consequences of the Draft Law<\/h3>\n<p>For various parties, this document entails the following changes:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>For the Judicial System:<\/strong> The main consequence will be a significant reduction in the workload of HACC judges. Single-judge consideration will allow for more effective allocation of time and human resources, which, in turn, will accelerate the consideration of criminal proceedings.<\/li>\n<li><strong>For Legislators and Experts:<\/strong> The draft realizes the requirement for &#8220;active and effective investigations&#8221; within the framework of Ukraine&#8217;s anti-corruption program. It is an indicator that the state is seeking ways to emerge from the &#8220;bottleneck&#8221; in the anti-corruption vertical.<\/li>\n<li><strong>For Business and Citizens:<\/strong> A mechanism is introduced whereby <strong>single-judge consideration will become the general rule<\/strong>, yet the right to collegiate consideration is preserved for certain subjects upon a corresponding motion. This balances the state&#8217;s interest in procedural speed and the participants&#8217; interest in a maximally balanced approach to complex issues.<\/li>\n<li><strong>For the Budget:<\/strong> It is important to note that the draft law is free of charge for taxpayers \u2014 it does not require additional expenditures from the state or local budgets.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>In conclusion, one can say that this draft is purely a technical, yet extremely necessary step to unblock the effective operation of the HACC. It does not alter the legal nature of the judiciary, but merely adapts procedural forms to current realities.<\/p>\n<p>Analysis of Other Documents:<\/p>\n<p>Greetings. As a lawyer with 15 years of experience, I have analyzed the provided documents regarding the draft law on amendments to the CPC and CAJ of Ukraine concerning the activities of the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC).<\/p>\n<h3>1. The Author&#8217;s Position on the Draft Law<\/h3>\n<p>The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, as the subject of legislative initiative, fully supports this draft law and insists on its adoption. The Government views these changes as a necessary step for improving the procedural activities of the HACC and optimizing mechanisms for considering anti-corruption cases.<\/p>\n<h3>2. Main Provisions for Analysis<\/h3>\n<p>To understand the essence of the proposed changes, three key aspects should be highlighted that are of significant importance to the legal community and citizens:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Transition to Single-Judge Consideration:<\/strong> The main idea of the draft law is to change the standard practice of considering cases on civil forfeiture (declaring assets unjustified) from collegiate to single-judge. This will significantly accelerate the judicial process, as collegiate consideration objectively requires more time to coordinate judges&#8217; schedules.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Exclusive Right to Collegiality for Top Officials:<\/strong> The draft law provides the &#8220;right to a panel&#8221; only for a clearly defined list of senior state officials (the President, the Prime Minister, MPs, CCU judges, etc.). At the same time, collegiate consideration does not become mandatory, but is applied <strong>exclusively upon the defendant\u2019s own motion<\/strong>. This can be regarded as an additional protection guarantee for individuals holding the highest state offices.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Procedural Discipline:<\/strong> Clear time limits are established for filing a motion for collegiate consideration \u2014 this must be done before the case is scheduled for hearing on the merits. If a defendant &#8220;comes to their senses&#8221; later, the court will leave such a motion without consideration. This is an important tool for preventing the abuse of procedural rights for the purpose of delaying case consideration.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Conclusion for business and society:<\/strong> The draft law is aimed at decentralizing the workload on HACC judges and increasing the promptness of justice. At the same time, a special filter in the form of the right to collegiate consideration is created for high-ranking officials, which should balance procedural equality, considering the high responsibility and public significance of cases involving such persons.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/itd.rada.gov.ua\/billInfo\/Bills\/Card\/70700\"><strong>Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Analysis of the Draft Law: Analysis of the Draft Law on Improving the Procedure for Consideration of Cases by the High Anti-Corruption Court This draft law is aimed at optimizing the procedural activities of the High Anti-Corruption Court (HACC) by changing the principle of forming the composition of the court when considering certain categories of&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"pmpro_default_level":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[56],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-19482","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ukrainian-law-bills","pmpro-has-access"],"acf":{"patreon-level":0},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19482","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=19482"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19482\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19482"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19482"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19482"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}