Negative Integrity Conclusion on Kravchenko Maksym Volodymyrovych: 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

"State Border Guard Service data shows that the candidate crossed the administrative border with temporarily occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea through checkpoint 601 (Chongar) at least three times during 04.06.2016-05.06.2016, 21.07.2016-23.07.2016, 07.08.2016-10.08.2016. The 2015 declaration did not specify the value of an apartment in Partenit (Autonomous Republic of Crimea) owned by my son. "

Context: The PIC treats crossing into Crimea and owning property there as integrity violations comparable to collaboration with Russia, thereby implicitly recognizing Russian control over Ukrainian territory.

⚖️ Why This Is a Violation

The PIC cited the candidate’s three trips to occupied Crimea in 2016 and undisclosed property in Crimea (son’s apartment in Partenit) as primary grounds for negative integrity conclusion. By treating these connections to Crimea as integrity violations equivalent to collaboration with the aggressor state, the PIC operationally recognized Russian jurisdiction over the peninsula rather than treating Crimea as 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 September 26, 2025, the Public Integrity Council approved a negative integrity conclusion on Kravchenko Maksym Volodymyrovych (Кравченко Максим Володимирович), a candidate for a position at Court of Appeal. The conclusion was adopted by 14 of 19 members.

The PIC cited the candidate’s three trips to occupied Crimea in 2016 and undisclosed property in Crimea (son’s apartment in Partenit) as primary grounds for negative integrity conclusion. By treating these connections to Crimea as integrity violations equivalent to collaboration with the aggressor state, the PIC operationally recognized Russian jurisdiction over the peninsula rather than treating Crimea as occupied Ukrainian territory.

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


The Crimea Connection#

State Border Guard Service data shows that the candidate crossed the administrative border with temporarily occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea through checkpoint 601 (Chongar) at least three times during 04.06.2016-05.06.2016, 21.07.2016-23.07.2016, 07.08.2016-10.08.2016. The 2015 declaration did not specify the value of an apartment in Partenit (Autonomous Republic of Crimea) owned by my son.

The PIC treats crossing into Crimea and owning property there as integrity violations comparable to collaboration with Russia, thereby implicitly recognizing Russian control over 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.


Voters#

#Member
1Anastasiia Borema
2Orest Bumba
3Olha Veretilnyk
4Yaroslava Volvach
5Eleonora Yemets
6Anton Zelinskyi
7Svitlana Ilnytska
8Mariia Krasnenko
9Serhii Kryvonos
10Oksana Mykhalevych
11Yaroslav Nahalka
12Artem Panchenko
13Dmytro Tuzov
14Serhii Fesenko

Verification#

  • Official PIC conclusion document dated September 26, 2025, available on the Council’s public website.
  • Electronic voting record confirming the vote count and participating members.