April 19, 2023
On Wednesday, April 19, 2023, at the public part of the plenary session, the First Senate deliberated the case upon the constitutional complaint of Volodymyr Tymoshenkov in the form of written proceedings regarding compliance of paragraph 19.6 of Section II “Final and Transitional Provisions” of the Law of Ukraine “On Amending Certain Legislative Acts regarding the Immediate Measures of the Prosecution Service Reform” dated September 19, 2019 No. 113-IX (hereinafter referred to as the “Law No. 113”) with the Constitution of Ukraine.
During the plenary session, judge-rapporteur in the case Viktor Kychun informed about the content of the constitutional complaint, the progress of the case in the courts and the substantiation of the applicant.
In particular, the judge noted that Volodymyr Tymoshenkov appealed to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine to examine the compliance of paragraph 19.6 of Section II “Final and Transitional Provisions” of Law No. 113 regarding the limitation of constitutional guarantees in terms of deprivation of labour rights and freedoms and groundless state interference in private and the professional life of the subject of the right to constitutional complaint, in particular, the dismissal of the prosecutor while on sick leave, with the provisions of Article 8.1, Article 22.2, Article 22.3, Article 24.1, Article 24.2, Article 43.1, Article 43.2, Article 43.6 of the Constitution of Ukraine.
The disputed provision of Law No. 113 establishes that “a prosecutor's stay on sick leave due to temporary incapacity, on vacation or on a business trip to the National Academy of the Prosecution Office of Ukraine to participate in its work on a permanent basis is not an obstacle to his dismissal from the office of prosecutor in accordance with this paragraph”.
As can be seen from the case files, Volodymyr Tymoshenkov was dismissed from the office of prosecutor of the prosecution office by order of the Prosecutor General on the basis of Article 51.1.9 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Prosecution Service”. The General Prosecution Office sent him a letter informing him of the rejection of his application, since it was not submitted according to the prescribed form and indicated that there were no grounds for attestation and transfer to the office of prosecutor at the Office of the Prosecutor General.
The applicant believes that the contested provision of Law No. 113 became the basis for the courts to reject his justifications for his dismissal.
He claims that the provisions of paragraph 19.6 of Section II "Final and Transitional Provisions" of Law No. 113 “violate the rights to the possibility to earn one's living by labour that he or she freely chooses; for the state to create conditions for citizens to fully exercise their right to labour, to protection from unlawful dismissal, guaranteed by the Article 43.1, Article 43.2, Article 43.6 of the Constitution of Ukraine”.
After examining the case files in the public part of the plenary session, the First Senate proceeded to the in-camera part for a decision.
Volodymyr Tymoshenkov, the subject of the right to constitutional complaint, Maksym Dyrdin, Permanent Representative of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, and other citizens attended the session.
The public part of the plenary session is available on the official website of the Court in the section “Archive of Video Broadcasts of the Court”.
