Today, 17 November, the judges of the First 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 Mykola Kostina on conformity of the specific provision of clause 26 of Section VI “Final and Transitional Provisions“ of the Budget Code of Ukraine (hereinafter – the Code) to the Constitution of Ukraine.
Viktor Kychun, the judge-rapporteur in this case, noted that the subject of the right to constitutional complaint applied to the Constitutional Court with a submission to examine the conformity of the disputed provisions to Articles 8.1, 8.2, 22.3 and 46.1 of the Constitution of Ukraine.
Pursuant to the disputed provision of the Code, the norms and provisions of some articles of the Law of Ukraine “On the Status and Social Protection of Citizens Affected by the Chornobyl Disaster“ of 28 February 1991 No. 796–ХІІ are applied in the manner and in the amounts established by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, proceeding from the available financial resources of the state and local budgets and budgetary funds of the general mandatory state social insurance.
In substantiating his position, the author of the complaint noted that social protection of individuals affected by the Chornobyl disaster is the state guarantee and has unconditional character and therefore may not depend on available financial resources.
In the applicant’s opinion, the disputed provision of the Code is not in line with the rules of the Constitution of Ukraine since it limits the content and the scope of the previously established guarantees of social protection of citizens affected by the Chornobyl disaster and raises the issue of implementation of the said social guarantees depending on the available financial budgetary resources in violation of the principle of the rule of law established by the Constitution of Ukraine.
In order to provide comprehensive and objective examination of the case, the judge-rapporteur sent a number of inquiries to the higher educational establishments, academic institutions and specific scholars to clarify the positions regarding the issues raised in the constitutional complaints.
Having examined the case files in the public part of the plenary session, the Court proceeded to the in-camera part for decision-making.
The public part of the plenary session is available at the official website of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine under the heading “Archive of video broadcasts of the sessions”.
***
The same day, the First 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 Trutniev on conformity of the provisions of Article 142.1 of the Code of Administrative Offences of Ukraine (hereinafter – the Code) to the Constitution of Ukraine.
Viktor Kychun, the judge-rapporteur in this case outlined the content of the constitutional complaint and the grounds to initiate the constitutional proceedings.
In particular, it was noted that in substantiating the unconstitutionality of Article 142.1, the subject referred to specific provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine, the Code, the case-law of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, the European Court of Human Rights and the court decisions in his case.
S.Trutniev indicated that his constitutional rights had been violated notably: ,,the right to inadmissibility of narrowing the content and the scope of the existing rights and freedoms when adopting new or amending the effective laws; the right to individualisation of legal liability; the right to obtain motivated accusation based on evidence received in a legal manner and which is not based on assumptions and in case of doubts on the proof of guilt to receive their interpretation in one’s favour; the right to inadmissibility of limitation of human rights except for cases envisaged by the Basic Law of Ukraine“.
In order to provide comprehensive and objective examination of the case, the judge-rapporteur sent a number of inquiries to the higher educational establishments, academic institutions and specific scholars to clarify the positions regarding the issues raised in the constitutional complaints
Viktor Kychun also informed that the submissions on joining the constitutional proceedings in this case with the proceedings in the case upon the constitutional complaints of A.Zabara, G.Martyrosyan and N.Kopylova pending the Grand Chamber had been logged with the Court.
Having examined the case files in the public part of the plenary session, the Court proceeded to the in-camera part for decision-making.
The plenary session was attended by the subject of the right to constitutional complaint S.Trutniev.
The public part of the plenary session is available at the official website of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine under the heading “Archive of video broadcasts of the sessions”.
