Negative Integrity Conclusion on Tetiana Dmytrivna Shevyrina: 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

"The candidate and members of her family visited the territory of the aggressor state, temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine without urgent need... The candidate and her family have relatives in the temporarily occupied territory (AR Crimea) and recorded multiple trips by family members (after occupation)... the candidate's father visited temporarily occupied RF territories (AR Crimea) 11.04.2017–23.04.2017 and 01.07.2017–10.09.2017... the candidate's father-in-law made 8 more trips to RF territory and 2 trips to temporarily occupied Crimea "

Context: This quote demonstrates how the PIC equated Crimea with 'RF territories' and treated family connections and travel to Crimea as equivalent integrity risks to connections with Russia proper, thereby implicitly recognizing Russian jurisdiction over Ukrainian territory.

⚖️ Why This Is a Violation

The PIC explicitly treated the candidate’s family connections to occupied Crimea and multiple post-occupation trips by family members as integrity violations equivalent to connections with the Russian Federation. By categorizing travel to Crimea as visiting ’temporarily occupied territories’ and ’territory of the aggressor state’ alongside Russia proper, the PIC operationally recognized Russian jurisdiction over Ukrainian Crimea, making these family ties and trips grounds for negative integrity assessment. 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 March 16, 2026, the Public Integrity Council approved a negative integrity conclusion on Tetiana Dmytrivna Shevyrina (Шевиріна Тетяна Дмитрівна), a candidate for a position at Ochakiv City-District Court of Mykolaiv Oblast. The conclusion was adopted by 12 of 19 members.

The PIC explicitly treated the candidate’s family connections to occupied Crimea and multiple post-occupation trips by family members as integrity violations equivalent to connections with the Russian Federation. By categorizing travel to Crimea as visiting ’temporarily occupied territories’ and ’territory of the aggressor state’ alongside Russia proper, the PIC operationally recognized Russian jurisdiction over Ukrainian Crimea, making these family ties and trips grounds for negative integrity assessment.

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


The Crimea Connection#

The candidate and members of her family visited the territory of the aggressor state, temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine without urgent need… The candidate and her family have relatives in the temporarily occupied territory (AR Crimea) and recorded multiple trips by family members (after occupation)… the candidate’s father visited temporarily occupied RF territories (AR Crimea) 11.04.2017–23.04.2017 and 01.07.2017–10.09.2017… the candidate’s father-in-law made 8 more trips to RF territory and 2 trips to temporarily occupied Crimea

This quote demonstrates how the PIC equated Crimea with ‘‘RF territories’’ and treated family connections and travel to Crimea as equivalent integrity risks to connections with Russia proper, thereby implicitly recognizing Russian jurisdiction 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
1Oleg Baturin
2Anastasiia Borema
3Olha Veretilnyk
4Mariia Horban
5Eleonora Yemets
6Svitlana Ilnytska
7Mariia Krasnenko
8Serhii Kryvonos
9Yaroslav Nahalka
10Yuliia Oleshchenko
11Artem Panchenko
12Dmytro Tuzov

Verification#

  • Official PIC conclusion document dated March 16, 2026, available on the Council’s public website.
  • Electronic voting record confirming the vote count and participating members.