After the adoption of the law on the liquidation of the District Administrative Court of the City of Kyiv (OASC) in December 2022, many questions arose as to how exactly this reform affected the activities of judges and budget expenditures. The law signed by Volodymyr Zelensky provided for the closing of the court and the transfer of its functions to the Kyiv City District Administrative Court. However, despite the fact that the court stopped hearing cases, many OASK judges continue to receive salaries without fulfilling their duties. The Informant writes about it.
Since the beginning of 2022, judges of the OASK, who did not participate in the trial, have received more than 99 million hryvnias. This caused indignation, because at the same time, the District and Economic Courts of Kyiv spent more than 76 million hryvnias to pay the judges, who also did not work during the war.
Official information from the OASK indicates that, despite the liquidation, 47 judges remained in the court, who received about 95 million hryvnias over the course of 2.5 years. These sums include salaries for judges who are formally decommissioned but continue to be on the court staff.
After the entry into force of the law on December 15, 2022, all cases were transferred to the new Kyiv City District Administrative Court, and OASK ceased its activities. Nevertheless, judges continued to receive salaries, although they did not perform their duties. For example, the head of the court, Pavlo Vovk, without considering a single case in 2023, earned about 1.9 million hryvnias, compared to 2 million hryvnias in 2022, when the court was still functioning.
There are currently more than 480 judges in Ukraine who do not actually perform their duties, but continue to receive salaries. Each of them costs the budget an average of over 1.2 million hryvnias per year. This is due to a variety of reasons, including expiration of term of office, reorganization of the court, suspension for offenses, mobilization for the military, delays in taking the oath or undergoing judicial training.
Also, it is important to note that the reasons for judicial inactivity may be related to delays in administrative processes or personal circumstances such as maternity leave, although the latter reason rarely leads to significant costs for the maintenance of judges.
