The current stage of state-building in Ukraine is marked by another reform of public prosecution bodies which involves an assessment of current prosecutors’ compliance with the criteria of professional competence, bona fide conduct and professional ethics; it also provides for creation of new legislative prerequisites for empowering individuals who have appropriate training with the option to hold positions in the Public Prosecutor’s offices at all levels. The legal framework for such a staff reset, which is particularly represented by relevant orders of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine, provokes an intense discussion among scientists as well as among practitioners and attracts particular attention, given the recent distrust of the Prosecutor General expressed by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine for the reason of low efficiency of his performance and, consequently, for being unfit for this position.

The purpose of the article is to analyze the legal framework for the staff reset of public prosecution bodies in Ukraine at the present stage through the lens of their compliance with the European standards of public prosecutor’s independence, and also to formulate a generalized vision of the prospects for regulation of these relations.

It is established that upon adoption of the new Law of Ukraine “On Public Prosecution”, a systemic change of the administration entities of the public prosecution system occurred stemming from the establishment of an entity within this system which was new at that time - the Public Prosecutors Qualification and Disciplinary Commission; its purpose was to perform the main staffing functions for the prosecution bodies which earlier were monopolistically exercised by public prosecutors who held administrative positions, and this entailed a significant limitation of such a guarantee available to a public prosecutor as his independence and transparency of public prosecution. The current stage of the staff reform of public prosecution bodies in Ukraine is marked by legal regulations targeted at termination of operation of this institution rather than at its improvement, as well as at setting up of a mechanism for selection of prosecutors which eventually forms such staff reset conditions that are discriminatory to the persons with public prosecution experience.

The article proves that the situational staff reset of public prosecution bodies, which is supported by temporary legal regulation, is due to the current political situation, is inconsistent with the European standards ensuring independence of the public prosecution service, and is inconsistent with such elements of the rule of law principle as legal certainty, prohibition of arbitrariness, and respect for human rights; and also prohibition of discrimination and equality before the law. It is proposed that a candidate for the position of Prosecutor General of Ukraine should pass a qualification assessment to confirm his/ her ability to be at the head of the public prosecution system as an allied legal institution in the justice system with a view to transforming the process of selection of a candidate for the position of Prosecutor General of Ukraine from a purely political to a professional one, and enhancing the guarantees of external independence of the Public Prosecutor’s office as an element of the justice system.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Kostenko S, Kvalifikatsiino-dystsyplinarna komisiia prokuroriv: pravovyi status ta shliakhy reformuvannia [Qualification and Disciplinary Commission of Prosecutors: Legal Status and Ways of Reform] (Natsionalna akademiia prokuratury Ukrainy 2019) (in Ukrainian).

Websites

2. ‘Reforma prokuratury, zaproponovana Zelenskym, likviduie mistseve samovriaduvannia – Friz’ [‘Zelensky’s Prosecutor’s Reform Eliminates Local Government – Freese’] (Priamyi, 05.09.2019) <https://prm.ua/reforma-prokuraturi-zaproponovanazelenskimlikviduye-samovryaduvannya-friz> (accessed: 17.03.2020) (in Ukrainian).

3. ‘Riaboshapka natiaknuv, shcho v Ukraini mozhut likviduvaty viiskovu prokuraturu’ [‘Ryaboshapka Hinted that Military Prosecutor’s Office Could be Liquidated in Ukraine’] (Ukrainska pravda, 07.09.2019) <https://www.pravda.com.ua/ news/2019/08/7/7222959> (accessed: 01.03.2020) (in Ukrainian).

4. Banchuk O, ‘4 roky zmin u prokuraturi Ukrainy: dva kroky vpered, odyn nazad’ [‘4 Years of Change in the Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine: Two Steps Forward, One Back’] (Tsentr polityko-pravovykh reform, 23.10.2018) <https://www.pravo.org.ua/ua/ news/20873335-4-roki-zmin-u-prokuraturi-ukrayini-dva-kroki-vpered,-odin-nazad> (accessed: 17.03.2020) (in Ukrainian).

5. Fazekosh O, ‘Z pozytsii “zlisnoho shkidnytstva”’ [‘From the Standpoint of “Malicious Wrecking”’] (Zakon i Biznes, 19.10–25.10.2019) <https://zib.com.ua/ ua/139659-reformu vannya_prokuraturi_z_poziciy_zlisnogo_shkidnictva.html> (accessed: 17.03.2020) (in Ukrai nian). 6. Riaboshapka R ta inshi, ‘Vidnovyty doviru do prokuratury: misiia zdiisnenna’ [‘Restore the Credibility to the Prosecutor’s Office: Mission Accomplished’] (ZN.UA, 26.12.2019) <https://dt.ua/article/print/internal/vidnoviti-doviru-do-prokuraturi-misiyazdiysnenna334126_.html> (accessed:16.03.2020) (in Ukrainian).