The Council of Judges clarified when family ties between a judge and an assistant do not constitute a conflict of interest
The Council of Judges of Ukraine adopted decision No. 25, which detailed the clarification of the presence or absence of a conflict of interest in situations when a close relative of another judge of the same or higher court works as an assistant to a judge in an administrative position.
The reason for consideration was the appeal of Supreme Court judge Mykhailo Smokovych.
The Council of Judges noted that there is no conflict of interest in the situation when a close relative of another judge works as an assistant to a judge, including one holding an administrative position — the head of the court or his deputy.
The Council of Judges substantiated its position with several key theses.
The assistant position belongs to the patronage service, and the selection is carried out directly by the judge himself. The assistant is accountable and subordinate exclusively to his own judge and is not subordinate to any other judge.
The assignment of powers to a judge as the head of the court or deputy is purely an administrative factor. Judges, when administering justice, are not administratively dependent on the court leadership. Such subordination does not exist between lower and higher courts either.
The mere review in appellate or cassation procedure of decisions of a judge vested with administrative powers, whose assistant is a relative of a higher court judge, does not create a conflict of interest (if there is no other private interest).
When does the risk of a conflict of interest still arise?
Despite the general absence of conflict, the Council of Judges highlighted certain procedural exceptions.
A potential conflict of interest arises if the assistant of a judge, who is a close relative of another judge, is directly involved in the court process — for example, performing the duties of a court session secretary.
A real conflict of interest occurs if a judge who is a close relative of such an assistant (acting as secretary) participates in the same court session.
Such a conflict is resolved procedurally — through self-recusal (challenge) of the judge, or by removing the person from performing duties if procedural regulation is not provided.
What to do in the presence of a private interest?
If there is a private interest in the case (personal, family, or friendly relations), the judge is obliged to act according to the defined algorithm:
- Disclose information about the conflict of interest to the participants of the process.
- Declare self-recusal (or wait for a challenge).
If after official disclosure the participants do not challenge the judge, the conflict of interest is considered resolved.
Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp, page on Facebook and on Instagram to stay informed about the most important events.
