In the Case on Social Protection of Servicemen and Reservists,
the Court Proceeded to the In-Camera Part of the Plenary Session
On April 28, 2021 the Second Senate of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine at the public part of the plenary session in the form of written proceedings considered the case upon the constitutional complaint of Serhiy Polishchuk, who appealed to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine to review the constitutionality of paragraph 4 of Article 16-3 of the Law of Ukraine "On Social and Legal Protection of Servicemen and Members of their Families" of December 20, 1991 № 2011–XII (hereinafter - the Law).
During the plenary session, Judge-Rapporteur in the case Vasyl Lemak presented the content of the constitutional complaint and the grounds for initiating constitutional proceedings in the case.
According to the disputed provisions of the Law, “if within two years a serviceman, conscript or reservist after the initial establishment of disability or degree of disability without establishment of disability during re-examination will be assigned a higher disability group or a higher percentage of disability, which gives them one-time financial assistance in a larger amount, payment is made taking into account the amount previously paid.
In the event of a change in the disability group, its cause or the degree of disability for more than two years after the initial establishment of disability, a one-time financial assistance is not paid due to the changes that have taken place."
The Judge-Rapporteur noted that, in the opinion of the complainant, the disputed provisions of the Law do not comply with the Constitution of Ukraine, as they violate the right to social protection and the principle of equality before the law.
In addition, according to the applicant, this approach of the legislator does not provide servicemen and persons discharged from military service with equal and appropriate conditions of social protection, and also narrows the scope and content of the existing rights of these persons by establishing discriminatory conditions under which certain persons are limited in time to receive a one-time financial assistance.
In order to fully and objectively consider the case, the Court sent inquiries to public authorities and higher education institutions.
After examining the case file in the public part of the plenary session, the Court proceeded to the in-camera part of the plenary session for a decision.
Dmytro Lavrentyev, the authorised representative of the subject of the right to constitutional complaint, was present at the plenary session.
The public part of the plenary session is available at the following link: archive of video broadcasts of the meetings.
