April 5, 2023
On Wednesday, April 5, 2023, the Second Senate at the public part of the plenary session in the form of oral proceedings deliberated the case upon the constitutional complaint of the Primary trade union organisation of the All-Ukrainian trade union of workers of science, production and finance of PJSC “Arcelor Mittal Kryvyi Rih” regarding the constitutionality of Article 7.1.1 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Procedure for Resolving Collective Labour Disputes (Conflicts)” dated March 3, 1998 No. 137/98-VR (hereinafter referred to as “the Law”).
During the plenary session, the judge-rapporteur in the case, Oleh Pervomaiskyi, explained the content of the constitutional complaint, the course of the case deliberation in the courts and the applicant's reasoning.
According to the judge-reporter, the applicant appealed to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine to examine the compliance of Article 7.1.1 of the Law with the Constitution of Ukraine, namely: deliberation of a collective labour dispute (conflict) is carried out by a conciliation commission on issues related to the establishment of new or changes to existing social economic conditions of work and industrial life; concluding or changing a collective agreement, agreement (paragraphs “a” and “b” of Article 2 of the Law), and labour arbitration - in case of failure to decide within the terms established by Article 9 of this Law.
As the subject of the right to a constitutional complaint notes, the contested provisions of Article 7 of the Law exclusively regulate the out-of-court procedure for resolving a collective labour dispute (conflict). In his opinion, the disputed provisions of the Law do not correspond to Article 8.3, Article 55.2, Article 55.6, Article 64, and Article 124.3 of the Constitution of Ukraine, as they narrow the scope of the rights defined by these articles, in particular the right to judicial protection.
The judge-rapporteur also informed on sending requests to state authorities, scientific institutions, and experts regarding the issues raised in the constitutional complaint to deliver their opinions.
During the plenary session, the Court heard the participants in the constitutional proceedings - the representative of the subject of the right to a constitutional complaint, Serhii Hapon, the Permanent Representative of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, Maksym Dyrdin, as well as the involved participant in the constitutional proceedings - the Head at National Service of Mediation and Reconciliation, Dmytro Kuhnyuk.
The Second Senate examined the materials of the case in the public part of the plenary session and proceeded to the in-camera part of the plenary session for a decision.
The session is available on the official website of the Court in the section “Archive of Video Broadcasts of Sessions”.
