Negative Integrity Conclusion on Kravchenko Maksym Volodymyrovych: Crimea Connection in Judicial Assessment

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, including Svitlana Ilnytska.

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.

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

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.

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 September 26, 2025.
• Electronic voting record confirming participation by Svitlana Ilnytska (14 of 19).