Negative Integrity Conclusion on Remezok Anastasiia Yuriivna: Crimea Connection in Judicial Assessment

🎯 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

"In August 2014, the judge together with her son visited the temporarily occupied territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. The PIC believes that despite the absence of direct prohibition on visiting the Russian Federation between 2014 and 2021, such trips without urgent necessity, first, created risks to the judge's independence and exposed her to the risk of coming under the influence of the aggressor state's intelligence services. "

Context: This quote demonstrates the PIC's implicit recognition of Russian jurisdiction by treating Crimea as equivalent to 'aggressor state territory' subject to the same integrity risks as Russia proper.

⚖️ Why This Is a Violation

The PIC flagged Judge Remezok’s August 2014 trip to occupied Crimea with her son as an integrity risk, treating the post-occupation visit as creating risks to judicial independence and potential exposure to aggressor state intelligence services. By characterizing travel to Crimea as equivalent to visiting the ‘aggressor state territory,’ the PIC effectively recognizes Russian jurisdiction over the peninsula. The Crimea-related element was flagged as a concern but was not cited as the primary 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 August 21, 2024, the Public Integrity Council approved a negative integrity conclusion on Remezok Anastasiia Yuriivna (Ремезок Анастасія Юріївна), a candidate for a position at Oleksandriiskyi City District Court of Kirovohrad Oblast. The conclusion was adopted by 13 of 20 members.

The PIC flagged Judge Remezok’s August 2014 trip to occupied Crimea with her son as an integrity risk, treating the post-occupation visit as creating risks to judicial independence and potential exposure to aggressor state intelligence services. By characterizing travel to Crimea as equivalent to visiting the ‘aggressor state territory,’ the PIC effectively recognizes Russian jurisdiction over the peninsula.

The Crimea-related element was flagged as a concern but was not cited as the primary basis for the negative conclusion.


The Crimea Connection#

In August 2014, the judge together with her son visited the temporarily occupied territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. The PIC believes that despite the absence of direct prohibition on visiting the Russian Federation between 2014 and 2021, such trips without urgent necessity, first, created risks to the judge’s independence and exposed her to the risk of coming under the influence of the aggressor state’s intelligence services.

This quote demonstrates the PIC’’s implicit recognition of Russian jurisdiction by treating Crimea as equivalent to ‘‘aggressor state territory’’ subject to the same integrity risks as Russia proper.


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.


Voters#

#Member
1Maryna Ansiforova
2Martyna Bohuslavets
3Oleksandr Voloshyn
4Anton Zelinskyi
5Svitlana Ilnytska
6Tetiana Katrychenko
7Andriy Kulibaba
8Tetiana Kurmanova
9Hanna Lysko
10Eduard Myelkykh
11Kostiantyn Smolov
12Olena Trybushna
13Oleg Yakimyak

Verification#

  • Official PIC conclusion document dated August 21, 2024, available on the Council’s public website.
  • Electronic voting record confirming the vote count and participating members.