Undoubtedly, the war has affected the administration of justice; some domestic courts were forced to suspend their operations due to active hostilities and temporary occupation. However, as of today, most courts, including those located in de-occupied territories, continue to operate.
Formally, the imposition of martial law does not affect the administration of justice. Furthermore, the Law of Ukraine “On the Legal Regime of Martial Law” stipulates that the powers of the courts cannot be suspended during martial law. However, in practice, ensuring the uninterrupted operation of the courts during wartime is extremely difficult.
At the start of the war, the courts largely did not administer justice. Typically, only individual cases within criminal proceedings were heard. There was no question of open hearings.
The transition period from February 24 to early April proved to be the most difficult.
However, starting April 1, the courts began actively resuming operations and sought to make them more comprehensive.
Even at the start of the full-scale war, the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine appealed to the Ministry of Digital Transformation regarding the need to provide courts with uninterrupted communication. Subsequently, the SJA, with the assistance of the Ministry of Digital Transformation, received StarLink satellite communication stations from SpaceX.
It is extremely important that the Supreme Court resumed operations on April 1, continuing to issue its legal rulings. Judicial bodies continued to work actively thereafter. According to the SJA, from the start of the war through August 1, courts adopted and submitted over 2 million decisions to the Unified State Register of Court Decisions.
Early in the full-scale war, the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine approached the Ministry of Digital Transformation regarding the need to ensure uninterrupted communication for the courts. Subsequently, with the assistance of the Ministry of Digital Transformation, the State Judicial Administration received Starlink satellite communication stations from SpaceX.
It is extremely important that the Supreme Court resumed operations on April 1, continuing to issue its legal rulings. Judicial bodies remained actively engaged thereafter. According to the SJA, from the start of the war through August 1, courts adopted and submitted over 2 million decisions to the Unified State Register of Court Decisions.
An equally important achievement was that, despite restrictions on the operation of the State Register of Court Decisions and the “Judicial Authority” portal, which were in effect until June 19, anyone could obtain up-to-date information on the status and outcomes of cases via telephone, Telegram channels, and media outlets on the internet.
Currently, court hearings are scheduled and held, courts issue decisions, and there are no obstacles to their enforcement. One can participate in hearings both in person and online using the EasyCon app. This tool has been a “game-changer” since the 2020 quarantine and is being used successfully today.
At the same time, certain issues directly related to the war remain.
Unfortunately, against the backdrop of constant power outages, the problem of court backlogs has intensified, and it is very difficult to determine a definitive solution at this time. In such a situation, court staff are objectively unable, regardless of their will, to perform a significant number of tasks that directly depend on a normal power supply. It is extremely difficult in this situation to distribute cases, conduct and record court hearings, and enter decisions into the Registry within reasonable timeframes. This causes dissatisfaction among both judicial branch employees and attorneys, who are accustomed to regularly participating in hearings.
Of course, power supply issues do partially affect the courts’ operations, but one cannot say that they have completely destabilized them.
“Standard” problems—such as court funding and staff shortages—remain sensitive issues.
Both in Kyiv and in other cities, there are problems with the delivery of summonses, court decisions, enforcement documents, and other correspondence due to underfunding of the costs associated with mailing.
Of course, the above-mentioned problems can be resolved if sufficient state, financial, and human resources are allocated to this effort.
For the full functioning of the judicial system and the administration of justice, it is necessary to develop and implement a mechanism for properly notifying parties to a case about proceedings and to resolve the issue of power supply in courts. The latter is already being gradually resolved.
A positive development is that the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine has reached out to international partners for technical assistance, requesting that they provide Ukrainian courts with alternative power sources.
In the current situation, it is extremely important to maintain stable communication between the various levels of the judicial system and to take into account the recommendations of higher-level courts, as the stability of the entire system as a whole depends on them.
It is also necessary to resolve the issue of the procedures for judges and court staff during air raid alerts. It is advisable to establish uniform rules for case proceedings, as approaches vary significantly among courts: in some courts, cases are removed from the docket, while others continue to hear cases regardless of the air raid alert.
The administration of justice by the courts under martial law is essential, as the courts are entrusted with the constitutional function of protecting the rights and interests of citizens and businesses. Of course, the judicial system has somewhat adjusted its operations during the war. However, the most important thing is that the judicial branch continues to function, and its staff are doing their utmost under any circumstances. It is imperative that the judicial system remains resilient, ensuring that fundamental rights are upheld even in the face of adversity. Continued access to legal recourse must be prioritized to prevent further erosion of civil liberties. Furthermore, ongoing assessments of the challenges faced by the judiciary during wartime will inform necessary reforms and adaptations, fostering a more robust framework for justice. Ultimately, the commitment to maintaining judicial integrity and accessibility is vital for the preservation of democracy and the rule of law.