the only one , seven members, international experts, right the decisive vote, but in the sense of the ksu, the people's deputies opposed something, it is difficult to say here, it is obvious that the constitutional court is probably even more important for the authorities than any body of judicial governance . roll back any reform, cancel , challenge any law to be constitutional, essentially liquidate almost any body, the same highest anti-corruption court, and let me remind you of the application for constitutional recognition above of the anti-corruption court submitted to the majority of mps of the russian federation, among whom there is a kiva, the same is also being considered in the constitutional court , it is now. very high here, but it is obvious that for the civil society there in the media, they are very citizens, it is also clear. therefore, with the help of western partners, i think it will be possible to break this situation, and after all, i really the logic of the judicial system means traces of general jurisdiction, everything happened in the same way as the constitutiona

simply, boil down to the fact that in the commission, which will to pre-selection of candidates in the ksuor 6 and 7 people, of them 4 representatives there with the help of various international organizations, yes, to whom i trust, who have great authority there, and three representatives of the authorities, so that there would be no graduation, as we have with a competition for a specialized the anti-corruption prosecutor's office when we have two years of contests being held, all are blocked and it is impossible to hold contests, yes, well , people's deputies obviously have to understand that selection from the constitutional court is one of the demands of our candidate, and what this gave us candidacy, but it will be reviewed , we completed this film, say no, because the candidate essentially gave you an advance, and in february we will have ukraine, the eu . the first evaluation well, it is important that these few months we simply comply with the legislation to those obligations that we have already assumed and said. so, we will carry out that the next year 27 points in accordance wi

wrote about the fact that the venice commission recommends that the exclusion of candidates to the ksuan also be carried out on the basis of professional competence , that is, those who will be candidates for the positions of judges of the constitutional court but the most important thing here is that the number of members of the preferred group of experts who actually have to control these people on the road to this red toga should be increased to seven, while the seventh the member was from the quota of international donors, this is important, not from yes, please explain and whether the authorities will fulfill these wishes , please yes, in fact, at the end of last year, it was voted by the verkhovna rada and quickly passed by the president, e-e law, which e-e pluer formation of the constitutional court, it is precisely the work of experts that was asked about, and this signed law provides for the creation of such a group consisting of six people, three of whom are appointed by the ukrainian authorities, let's say, and three by the international community. this contradicts the recom

procedure has another gap, says bargon, according to the law, the expert evaluates candidates for the ksuccording to the constitution, a candidate who has a grade is not responsible for by the level of competence, the person who has been eliminated from the competition and cannot sit in the chair in the court of the treasury, but in ukrainian law, everything is a little bit wrong if no candidate who received an assessment from the advisory group of experts does not answer received the majority of votes, conducts a vote on those candidates who received an assessment that does not meet the criteria of the recognized level of competence in the field of law, but behind the windows says let's also those who do not answer, and suddenly they will find votes for them and that's it. imagine there are votes for them, and then in the judge of the constitutional court is a person who does not meet the requirements of the law. and there is a decision about this. the decision of the commission created by the law is absurd ; moreover, it actually contradicts the constitution, according to the initiator