⚠️ Violation Context

🏛️ About

DEJURE Foundation#

The institutional sponsor, political advocate, and operational architect of the PIC system

DEJURE Foundation (Democracy Justice Reforms) is a Ukrainian judicial reform NGO co-founded in 2016 by Mykhailo Zhernakov, a former judge who is credited as one of the originators of the Public Integrity Council. DEJURE is documented on CrimeaWatch as the organization that created, institutionally sponsors, and politically defends the PIC — the body whose methodology systematically treats occupied Crimea as equivalent to Russian territory.

Why This Profile Exists#

DEJURE Foundation’s role in this documentation is distinct from all other entities. While CPLR provides the largest bloc of expert personnel and ADER HABER tolerates one employee’s PIC participation, DEJURE is the organization that brought the PIC into existence.

Mykhailo Zhernakov — DEJURE’s founder and Chair of the Board — is described by the EU Advisory Mission in Ukraine as a “Member and originator of the Council.” He served as PIC coordinator during the period (2019–2020) when the revised Indicators equating Crimea with Russia were developed and unanimously adopted. DEJURE continues to provide institutional support for the PIC’s operations, places its staff as PIC members across compositions, and serves as the PIC’s primary political defender when the institution faces legislative threats.

This originator’s role carries a unique weight: the PIC’s Crimea-recognition methodology is inseparable from the institutional framework that DEJURE built. An organization cannot create, staff, sponsor, and defend an institution while disavowing the methodology that institution applies.

The Originator’s Burden#

From judicial reform to territorial recognition#

Zhernakov founded DEJURE after voluntarily resigning from his position as a judge in 2015 to work in the civic sector. His stated goal was to promote judicial reform through integrity checks — a legitimate and important objective in Ukraine’s post-Maidan reform landscape.

However, the institution Zhernakov created and DEJURE sponsors — the PIC — developed a methodology that extends beyond legitimate integrity screening into territory that contradicts Ukraine’s constitutional framework. By treating connections to occupied Crimea as equivalent to connections with Russia, the PIC’s Indicators operate on the implicit premise that Crimea is under Russian jurisdiction — a premise that Ukraine’s Constitution, the Law on the Temporarily Occupied Territory, and UN General Assembly Resolution 68/262 all reject.

As the PIC’s originator, coordinator, and institutional sponsor, Zhernakov and DEJURE bear a level of responsibility for this methodology that exceeds that of any individual PIC member or contributing organization. Individual members vote on specific conclusions; DEJURE created the system in which those votes occur.

Institutional sponsorship ≠ distance#

DEJURE’s relationship with the PIC is not arm’s-length:

• DEJURE provides institutional support for PIC operations — not merely sending staff as individual civic participants.
• DEJURE politically defends the PIC against legislative threats — treating the PIC’s institutional integrity as DEJURE’s own organizational interest.
• DEJURE publishes PIC-related analysis through its own channels — functioning as the PIC’s communications arm.
• When the Verkhovna Rada attempted to limit PIC powers in 2023, Zhernakov personally led the opposition — inseparably linking DEJURE’s organizational advocacy with the PIC’s continued operation, including its Crimea-recognition methodology.

This level of institutional integration means that DEJURE cannot selectively endorse the PIC’s work while distancing itself from the PIC’s Crimea-related methodology. The methodology is part of the institution DEJURE built and defends.

The Rada Investigation: Structural Questions#

The Verkhovna Rada’s Temporary Investigative Commission (TIC) investigation in late 2025 raised structural questions about DEJURE’s relationship with the PIC that are directly relevant to this documentation:

Influence on PIC formation. Former PIC members alleged that pre-formed candidate lists existed and that Zhernakov had direct influence over who was selected for PIC compositions. If substantiated, this would mean that DEJURE not only created the PIC system but actively controls who staffs it — further concentrating responsibility for the PIC’s methodology within a single organization.

Donor fund transparency. Questions were raised about whether donor funds flowing through DEJURE were used to finance PIC members’ activities. If international donors’ rule-of-law funding was channeled through DEJURE to support PIC operations that apply Crimea-recognition methodology, this creates a donor accountability question analogous to (and potentially more direct than) the donor paradox identified in the CPLR profile.

Zhernakov’s refusal to testify. Zhernakov’s initial refusal to appear before the TIC — and the subsequent attempt at forcible delivery by the National Police — adds a dimension of institutional opacity that contrasts with the transparency DEJURE demands from the judicial system it seeks to reform.

Controversies and Criticism#

Originator’s responsibility for Crimea-recognition methodology. As the organization that created, sponsors, and defends the PIC, DEJURE bears foundational responsibility for the institution’s methodology — including its treatment of occupied Crimea as equivalent to Russian territory. This responsibility exceeds that of organizations that merely contribute personnel.

Coordinator during adoption of the Indicators. Zhernakov served as PIC coordinator during the period when the revised Indicators equating Crimea with Russia were developed and unanimously adopted (December 16, 2020). The coordinator’s role in shaping the agenda and methodology during this period has not been publicly addressed.

Allegations of influence over PIC composition. The Rada TIC investigation raised questions about whether DEJURE exerted direct influence over the selection of PIC members — potentially making the organization responsible not only for the PIC’s institutional structure but for the specific personnel who apply its Crimea-recognition methodology.

Donor fund transparency. Questions about the transparency of donor funding channeled through DEJURE for PIC-related activities remain unresolved, raising concerns about international donors’ indirect support for Crimea-recognition methodology.

Constitutional contradiction. An organization that describes its mission as promoting the “rule of law” and whose name stands for “Democracy Justice Reforms” sponsors an institution whose methodology contradicts fundamental constitutional provisions on Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

Summary#

DEJURE Foundation is documented on this site as the institutional originator, sponsor, and political defender of the Public Integrity Council — the body whose methodology systematically treats occupied Crimea as equivalent to Russian territory.

DEJURE’s founder Mykhailo Zhernakov created the PIC, coordinated it during the adoption of the Crimea-recognition Indicators, and continues to defend the institution against legislative oversight. DEJURE’s staff serve as PIC members across multiple compositions, and the organization provides ongoing institutional support for PIC operations. This level of institutional integration makes DEJURE inseparable from the PIC’s methodology, including its Crimea-recognition pattern.

The Verkhovna Rada’s 2025 investigation into DEJURE’s influence on PIC formation and donor fund transparency adds further questions about the concentration of institutional control over a body that, in practice, treats sovereign Ukrainian territory as operating under Russian jurisdiction.

ℹ️ What Else We Know

👥 Leadership

📅 Activity Timeline

📋 Documented Instances