Negative Integrity Conclusion on Shofarenko Yurii Fedorovych: Crimea Connection in Judicial Assessment

What Happened#

On March 26, 2026, the Public Integrity Council approved a negative integrity conclusion on Shofarenko Yurii Fedorovych (Шофаренко Юрій Федорович), a candidate for a position at Appellate court. The conclusion was adopted by 13 of 19 members, including Anastasiia Borema.

The PIC cited undisclosed declared income of 2,304,000 UAH from the sale of an apartment in Simferopol after the occupation began, lacking proper documentation and creating risks of conducting the transaction under occupation laws. By treating this Crimea property sale as an integrity risk requiring additional scrutiny, the PIC implicitly recognized Russian jurisdiction over the peninsula.

Anastasiia Borema voted in favor of this conclusion. The Crimea-related element was cited as a direct basis for the negative finding.

The Crimea Connection#

The candidate in his asset declaration for 2015 declared income of 2,304,000 UAH received from the disposal of real estate located in the temporarily occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea. The sale of real estate located in the temporarily occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea after the beginning of its occupation, in the absence of information about applicable legislation and procedure for formalizing such a transaction, may indicate a risk of carrying out relevant actions within the legal framework of the occupying state or with the participation of persons connected to the occupation authorities.

This quote demonstrates how the PIC treats property transactions in occupied Crimea as inherently problematic due to potential application of ‘‘occupying state’’ law, thereby recognizing Russian legal authority over the peninsula.

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.

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 — contradicting Ukraine’s constitutional position that Crimea is sovereign Ukrainian territory under temporary occupation.

This conclusion is part of a documented pattern: a systematic review of PIC conclusions reveals that across dozens of cases, judges and candidates were assessed negatively on the basis of connections to Crimea. The pattern was formally codified in the December 16, 2020 revised Indicators.

Verification#

• Official PIC conclusion document dated March 26, 2026.
• Electronic voting record confirming participation by Anastasiia Borema (13 of 19).