Negative Integrity Conclusion on Oleksiy Vasilyovych Bryntsev: Crimea Connection in Judicial Assessment

📋 Instance Information

Date:
April 20, 2017
Event:
PIC cited declared land plot in Sevastopol and multiple post-occupation trips to Russia as integrity concerns.
Location:
Kyiv, Ukraine
Venue Type:
Official meeting
Severity:
MEDIUM
Verified:
✓ Yes
Verified Date:
April 20, 2017

🎯 Position at Time of Violation

Position: Civic advisory body embedded in Ukraine's judicial governance system

Organization: Public Integrity Council of Ukraine (ГРД)

Period: 2016 – present

📄 The Document

"Filing the declaration of a person authorized to perform state or local government functions for 2015, the Candidate declared data on large assets, namely two land plots of 1826 sq. m. in the village of Lisne, Derhachi district, Kharkiv region and 1000 sq. m. in Sevastopol "

Context: This demonstrates the PIC's implicit recognition of Russian jurisdiction by treating Sevastopol property as a declarable asset subject to integrity assessment rather than as occupied Ukrainian territory.

⚖️ Why This Is a Violation

The PIC cited the candidate’s declared land plot in Sevastopol as part of his substantial assets requiring integrity assessment. By treating Sevastopol property as a legitimate asset for declaration purposes while simultaneously using it as grounds for negative integrity findings, the PIC implicitly treats Sevastopol as territory under Russian jurisdiction rather than occupied Ukrainian territory. The Crimea-related element was cited as a direct basis for the negative conclusion. By treating Crimea-related connections as grounds for integrity assessment within a formal state-adjacent procedure, the PIC operationally treats Crimea as Russian-administered territory — contradicting Ukraine’s constitutional and legal framework that defines Crimea as sovereign Ukrainian territory under temporary occupation.

📄 Full Details

What Happened#

On April 20, 2017, the Public Integrity Council approved a negative integrity conclusion on Oleksiy Vasilyovych Bryntsev (Бринцев Олексій Васильович), a candidate for a position at Supreme Court of Ukraine. The conclusion was adopted by unknown members.

The PIC cited the candidate’s declared land plot in Sevastopol as part of his substantial assets requiring integrity assessment. By treating Sevastopol property as a legitimate asset for declaration purposes while simultaneously using it as grounds for negative integrity findings, the PIC implicitly treats Sevastopol as territory under Russian jurisdiction rather than occupied Ukrainian territory.

The Crimea-related element was cited as a direct basis for the negative conclusion.

The Crimea Connection#

Filing the declaration of a person authorized to perform state or local government functions for 2015, the Candidate declared data on large assets, namely two land plots of 1826 sq. m. in the village of Lisne, Derhachi district, Kharkiv region and 1000 sq. m. in Sevastopol

This demonstrates the PIC’’s implicit recognition of Russian jurisdiction by treating Sevastopol property as a declarable asset subject to integrity assessment rather than as occupied Ukrainian territory.

Context#

The Public Integrity Council was established in 2016 as part of post-2014 judicial reform in Ukraine. Its mandate was to assist in vetting judges and judicial candidates based on integrity and professional ethics. While formally an advisory body, its conclusions carried significant weight in qualification proceedings and could directly affect judicial careers.

Under Ukrainian law, Crimea is a temporarily occupied territory under the Law on Ensuring the Rights and Freedoms of Citizens and the Legal Regime of the Temporarily Occupied Territory (2014). The Constitution of Ukraine affirms Crimea as an integral part of Ukraine whose status cannot be altered without an all-Ukrainian referendum.

By treating Crimea-related connections as integrity risks within a formal assessment framework, the PIC applies an operational logic that treats Crimea as Russian-administered territory — reproducing the same premise that was formally codified in the December 16, 2020 revised Indicators.

Verification#

  • Official PIC conclusion document dated April 20, 2017, available on the Council’s public website.
  • Electronic voting record confirming the vote count and participating members.

🔎 Evidence