NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM (NEW JUSTICE)

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT OCTOBER 2016 – SEPTEMBER 2017

October 31, 2017

This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by Chemonics International Inc.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM (NEW JUSTICE)

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT OCTOBER 2016 – SEPTEMBER 2017

Contract No. AID-OAA-1-13-00032, Task Order No. AID-121-TO-16-00003 Cover photo: 613 new Supreme Court judicial candidates taking anonymous testing conducted by the High Qualifications Commission of Judges of Ukraine with support from the USAID New Justice Program on February 16, 2017 in Kyiv. (Credit: USAID New Justice Program)

DISCLAIMER

The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States government.

CONTENTS

Acronyms ...... ii Executive Summary ...... 1 Program Overview ...... 3 Objective 1: Judicial Independence and Self Governance Strengthened ...... 3 Objective 2: Accountability and Transparency of the Judiciary to Citizens and the Rule of Law Increased ...... 11 Objective 3: Administration of Justice Enhanced ...... 13 Objective 4: Quality of Legal Education Strengthened ...... 20 Objective 5: Access to Justice Expanded and Human Rights Protected...... 24 Performance Management ...... 27 Budget Execution ...... 29 Administration and Project Management ...... 30 ANNEX A. M&E Plan ...... 33 ANNEX B. Milestones Progress Report ...... 69 ANNEX C. Program Environmental Compliance ...... 100 ANNEX D. Counterparts and Beneficiaries Actively Involved in the Project ...... 101 ANNEX E. Success Stories ...... 120 ANNEX F. Reports and Deliverables List ...... 124

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | I

ACRONYMS

ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution BPA Business Process Analysis CJC Community Justice Center CMI Court Management Institute COE Council of Europe COJ Council of Judges CRC Citizen Report Card CSO Civil Society Organization ENCJ European Network of Councils for the Judiciary ER Expected Result FAIR USAID Fair, Accountable, Independent, and Responsible Judiciary Program in Ukraine GOU Government of Ukraine HCJ High Council of Justice HQC High Qualifications Commission of Judges IAHR Institute for Applied Humanitarian Research IFJSE International Framework for Judicial Support Excellence IT Information Technology JRC Judicial Reform Council JSRS Justice Sector Reform Strategy LGBTI Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex LNU Lviv National University MOE Ministry of Education and Science MOJ Ministry of Justice MSU Michigan State University NABU National Anti-Corruption Bureau NAPC National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption NGO Nongovernmental Organization NSJ National School of Judges ODR Online Dispute Resolution OSCE Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | II

PIO Public Information Officer SAF Strategic Activities Fund SAG Strategic Advisory Group SGBV Sexual and Gender-based Violence SJA State Judicial Administration TOT Training of Trainers

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | III

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

USAID/Ukraine awarded the Nove Pravosuddya Justice Sector Reform Program (New Justice) to Chemonics International on October 1, 2016. This program expands on the USAID/Ukraine Fair, Accountable, Independent and Responsible Judiciary Program in Ukraine (FAIR), which implemented activities from October 1, 2011 to September 30, 2016.

New Justice is a four-year and four-month program that is designed to support the judiciary, government, parliament, bar, law schools, civil society, media, and citizens to create the conditions for an independent, accountable, transparent, and effective justice system that upholds the rule of law and fights corruption in Ukraine. In achieving this overarching goal, New Justice focuses on the following five key objectives and expected results:

Objective 1: Judicial Independence and Self-Governance Strengthened • 1.1: Improve the legal framework for the justice sector, namely, the Law on the Judiciary and Status of Judges, the Law on the High Council of Justice, the Law on Bar and Law Practice. Moreover, New Justice efforts are aimed at supporting the Constitutional Commission Human Rights Working Group activities and the development of the legislative provisions regarding the establishment of anticorruption and intellectual property courts. • 1.2: Improve understanding and strengthen the support of new constitutional and legislative provisions by the judicial community and public. • 1.3: Improve effective interrelations between the judiciary, executive power and Parliament with due respect to the judicial independence. • 1.3: Ensure legislative and regulatory framework is amended in a manner that encourages inclusive discussion and vetting of reform proposals.

Objective 2: Accountability and Transparency of the Judiciary to Citizens and the Rule of Law Increased • 2.1: Support increased transparency of judiciary proceedings to encourage accountability of judicial leaders through internal and external accountability mechanisms. • 2.2: Enhance mechanisms for central oversight of the judiciary, while also ensuring the judicial independence is not compromised. • 2.3: Create formal linkages between the Judiciary, GOU, Parliament, and civil society to improve the Judiciary’s accountability to media, civil society, and citizens.

Objective 3: Administration of Justice Enhanced • 3.1: Provide technical assistance to implement Ukraine’s justice reform priorities, including improvements to case management, e-justice tools, workflow analysis and management, budget and financial planning, and human resources. • 3.2: Support the development of an improved court performance curriculum training program to ensure judges and judicial personnel have access to high quality, modern, and professional development services. • 3.3: Provide tools and resources based on regional and international best practices to support the development of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms. • 3.4: Support establishing GOU dispute enforcement mechanisms to strengthen enforcement of judgments and reduce susceptibility to corruption.

Objective 4: Quality of Legal Education Strengthened • 4.1: Support the development of a comprehensive legal education strategy that ensures uniformity and quality of legal education.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | IV

• 4.2: Support establishing effective quality assurance systems in accordance with the country’s Law on Higher Education. • 4.3: Support the development of improved instructional methods and tools that prepare graduates for successful entry into the legal profession.

Objective 5: Access to Justice Expanded and Human Rights Protected • 5.1: Improve justice pathways for citizens, particularly vulnerable and marginalized populations (women, GBV and SGBV survivors, IDPs, persons with disabilities, veterans) to access services and obtain swift remedies to their unique challenges. 5.2: Improve knowledge on human rights laws and standards among the Judiciary and advocates to improve referral pathways for services support, and to empower citizens to advocate for their rights and the rights of the most vulnerable.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | IV

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Pursuant to section F.3.D.2 of the contract, the following section discusses and analyzes the current status of affairs, key achievements to date and explains deviations in implementation of the work plan for each Objective from October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2017.

OBJECTIVE 1: JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE AND SELF GOVERNANCE STRENGTHENED Current Status of Affairs

Judicial independence is central in a democratic society governed by the rule of law. It guarantees that everyone has a right to a fair trial. Whereas judicial self-governance in fostering the ability of each judge to resist improper pressure and promote a no tolerance policy to violations of the separations of powers. Under this objective, New Justice worked to assist institutional partners in ensuring proper implementation of key legislative amendments and identifying gaps and inefficiencies to be addressed.

Anti-corruption court. Aiming to develop a legislative framework to establish anti-corruption courts, New Justice identified the anti-corruption courts’ jurisdiction, criteria for the selection of the judges and court staff, and standards for the consideration of cases as key areas for additional investigation and consensus-building. The legislative initiatives in this area include two drafts, which propose different approaches to the status of the anticorruption court. In order to receive the feedback from the European experts, the Speaker of the Parliament send both of them to the Venice Commission of the Council fo Europe. In early October, the Commission came up with the opinion, which will become the basis of the further legislative initiatives in this area. The Commission came up with the throughout review of both drafts and the list of recommendations for further improvements.

Constitution. The Constitutional Commission created a working group to address the status of the Republic of Crimea. Refat Chubarov, member of the Constitutional Commission, presented the vision of the Medzhlis of Crimean Tatars under three main points: (1) the right for the self- determination of the Crimean Tatars; (2) the respect to the territorial sovereignty and integrity of Ukraine; and (3) equal rights to all the inhabitants of the Crimean Peninsula. As of now, the working group continues its activity to develop the relevant provisison of the Constitution and to present its proposal later to the Constitutional Commision.

Judicial self-governance. To-date three institutions exercise functions of judicial self-governance in Ukraine – COJ, HCJ and HQC. Thus, it is difficult to have a unified approach to the issues related to the judiciary and letting judiciary speak with one voice. Although it appears that most authority is concentrated with the HCJ, in practice it does not have sufficient institutional capacity and is forced to heavily rely on the support of other judicial bodies, including the SJA, in making decisions related to judicial selection and court administration.

Key Achievements to Date

Legislative Framework. New Justice continued to support review of the legislative framework for the criminal liability of the judges. Local expert Volodymyr Koreniak analyzed official statistics on criminal cases commenced under Article 375 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine and developed

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 3

recommendations on amending legislation to protect against manipulation of the Criminal Code. New Justice also hosted a discussion on improving the legislative framework in line with changes in the scope of the judicial immunity on April 13, 2017, and supported the HCJ working group in developing legislative proposals to amend legislation in this area.

Anti-corruption Courts. New Justice facilitated a study tour to Bratislava, Slovak Republic focusing on “Specialized Anti-Corruption Courts as a Tool to Improve Accountability and Access to Justice.” The Ukrainian delegation included members of the High Qualifications Commission of Judges (HQC), Council of Judges (COJ), Parliament, Ministry of Justice (MOJ), as well as civic activists to develop sound and coherent legislative framework for the anti-corruption courts in Ukraine include. Participants learned the following best practices that they plan to apply to set up specialized anti-corruption courts: (1) set specific criteria for selecting and testing judges of the anti-corruption court, including specialized knowledge of anti-corruption legislation as well as rigorous integrity, values and motivations tests for candidates; (2) identify indicators to measure the performance of the anti-corruption courts; and (3) Promote public awareness about the court to improve the overall level of trust in the judiciary.

International short-term anti-corruption experts met with Ukrainian stakeholders, representatives of the judiciary and donor community, and held meetings in the National Anti- Corruption Bureau and Specialized Anticorruption Prosecutor’s Office, where they highlighted the importance of public support for anti-corruption reforms, a clear mandate for courts and judges in the judicial system, and an integral approach to changes in the judiciary. Furthermore, New Justice and OSCE conducted a series of expert discussions titled “Specialized Anti- Corruption Court: Best Practices and Prospects for Ukraine” in Lviv. Judges, local experts, academics, donors, and media discussed the international experience of specialized anti- corruption courts and judges in these courts, reasons for creating them, institutional design options, and the status of the initiatives for the establishment of the High Anti-Corruption Court in Ukraine.

Since January 2017, the informal working group of international donors and civil society experts worked to develop the Common Understanding on the Basic Principles for Establishing the High Anti-Corruption Court in Ukraine. New Justice jointly with the OSCE, European Union Advisory Mission, and European Union Anti-Corruption Initiative hosted a discussion on this topic. The participants of the discussion were the key stakeholders including Members of the Parliament, representatives of the top judicial institutions, Administration of the President and experts. The event provided an overview of specialized anti-corruption courts and judges from around the world and discussed reasons for creating a specialized anti-corruption court and related institutional design choices and the status of initiatives for establishing the High Anti- Corruption Court in Ukraine.

Hybrid Courts. In April 2017, New Justice jointly with the USAID Participant Training Program (PTP) led a study tour to Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina on “Using Hybrid Approaches to Promote Accountability and Access to Justice.” The program included visits to the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Prosecutor’s Office, High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council, meetings with the representatives of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia Sarajevo Field Office and Ministry of Justice. The meetings during the study visit showed the positive effect of international experts’ involvement in the prosecution of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The the study tour participants agreed to work further to identify possible solutions for the implementation of the hybrid approaches in investigating, prosecuting and considering of the grave crimes, such as crimes against humanity and war crimes, which occure due to the annexation of Crimea and during the military actions in the East of Ukraine.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 4

Rule of Law. New Justice engaged local expert Serhii Holovaty to review the Ukrainian translation of the Venice Commission Rule of Law Checklist, and develop a commentary and glossary. The Checklist is a tool for assessing the state of the rule of law in each member country through evaluating its constitution, legal and regulatory framework and case law. On In June 2017, New Justice jointly with the Judicial Reform Council and Council of Europe Office in Ukraine presented on the the Rule of Law Checklist. Ambassador of the United States to Ukraine Marie L. Yovanovitch and President of the European Commission for Democracy Through Law (Venice Commission) Gianni Buquicchio participated in the event.

Constitutional reform. Since May, the working group, with the support from New Justice, works to develop common vision of the following issues: status of Crimea and Sevastopol, based on the rights of the Crimean Tatar peoples to self-determination; development of legal framework to enforce the constitutional changes; identification of the indigenous peoples; level of autonomy (self-government); collective rights; assurance of the principles of unity and indivisibility of the state territory of Ukraine; and national personal autonomy.

Code of Judidial Ethics. In November 2016, New Justice in close collaboration with the COJ presented a “Commentary to the Code of Judicial Ethics” to members of the HCJ, HQC, COJ, SJA, NSJ, Public Integrity Council (PIC), as well as judges, attorneys, journalists, lawyers, and academics. Building on the COJ Working Group’s progress under the FAIR project, the Commentary provides interpretation of Code of Judicial Ethics provisions for equal application by judges and judicial institutions. Members of the HCJ, HQC, and COJ discussed the importance of applying a unified approach to judicial ethics related issues by all judicial institutions while performing their functions. New Justice will integrate the Commentary into future training activities benefitting judges and judicial candidates.

HCJ Composition. New Justice provided support to the COJ’s XIV Extraordinary Congress of Judges (Congress of Judges) in March 2017. The Congress was held in order to implement constitutional amendments on the HCJ composition to elect six more judges, replace the retired justice of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, and amend internal procedural documents to conform with the new version of the Law on the Judiciary and Status of Judges. 320 delegates (out of 323 delegates) participated in the work of the Congress. The Congress of Judges approved the Rules of Procedure for the Congress of Judges of Ukraine, Regulation on the Council of Judges of Ukraine, and Rules of Procedure for the Congress of Judges of Ukraine. New Justice provided comments on these documents in advance, which were included in the final version. As a result of the two-round voting process, the Congress elected four out of six members of the HCJ.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 5

HCJ Study Tours. In April 2017, New Justice supported the HCJ in participating in a study visit to the High Council for the Judiciary of Italian Republic; and in May 2017, New Justice supported a study tour to the Portuguese High Council for the Judiciary. As a result, on May 30, 2017, the HCJ adopted a Regulation on the HCJ Commissions to actualize and effectively implement the HCJ statutory functions. Further, the HCJ brought back lessons learned and best practices Members of the Ukrainian delegation during the Judicial Self- from the study tours with the intent to Governance Study Visit to the Portuguese High Council for the Judiciary on May 17, 2017 in Lisbon, Portugal. PHOTO: USAID do the following: New Justice Program

• Competitively engage judges in assisting the members and perform legal research on the issues within the HCJ competencies • Introduce regular court management plans subject for review by the HCJ. • Develop a system to prevent judicial misconduct and raise judges' awareness of the current judicial discipline practice as part of the legislative framework for disciplinary liability of judges. • Consider creating an e-system for citizens to file complaints of judicial misconduct. • Develop e-tools to monitor judges’ adherence to judicial conduct standards and a dashboard reflecting performance of individual judges. • Improve HCJ internal management by developing strategic plans for structural units with performance indicators.

Anti-corruption. Local short-term expert Professor Mykola Khavronyuk analyzed Ukrainian laws and regulations for preventing and combatting corruption in the judiciary, judicial conflicts of interest, and corruption reporting mechanisms and discovered gaps and inconsistencies between the Laws on the Judiciary and Status of Judges, on the High Council of Justice, and on Preventing Corruption, and presented nearly 50 recommendations aimed at harmonizing these laws and respective regulations. His final report includes a summary of recommendations to the Parliamentary Committee on Legal Policy and Justice, Council of Judges of Ukraine, and National Agency on Corruption Prevention for consideration and implementation into effective laws and regulations.

Short-term expert Dr. Tilman Hoppe addressed the problems of detecting and managing conflicts of interest arising in the judicial activities, and implementation of mechanisms to track assets and monitor lifestyle of public officials, including judges. His report, “Managing Conflict of Interest in the Ukrainian Judiciary” includes an analysis of relevant Ukrainian laws, regulations and developed 50 recommendations to ensure effective management of the conflicts of interest of judges and other representatives of the judiciary.

In July-September, 2017, New Justice organized national surveys among judges, court staff, legal professionals involved in the court proceedings, and the general public and presented the results at an expert discussion “Corruption Perception and Risks Assessment in the Judiciary. An Effective Solution – the Launch of the Anti-Corruption Court. The results revealed that 66

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 6

percent of judges and 81 percent of legal professionals consider corruption to be the biggest issue for Ukraine. At the same time, only one in five judges and one in four citizens are ready to report corruption cases to the NABU or other law enforcement agencies, whereas almost 40 percent of legal professionals gave positive answer to this question.

New Justice facilitated application of the European Network of Council for the Judiciary (ENCJ) framework of judicial independence and accountability to the Ukrainian judicial system by including a set of indicators in the abovementioned survey among the judges to evaluate their perception of independence and corruption in the judiciary. Key results of this survey include the following: • 38% reported corruption among their colleagues – they accepted bribes as an inducement to decide cases in specific way. 48% mentioned that it happened regularly or occasionally, while 30% of judges disagree that their colleagues received bribes during last two years. • 38% believe their independence is protected by the HCJ while 22% rely on the COJ to protect their independence. • 11% of judges indicated that there were cases of inappropriate pressure to take a decision in a case or part of a case in a specific way during the last two years. • 21% mentioned cases being affected by a threat of disciplinary action, and 15% by a threat of criminal or administrative action because of case decision. New Justice continued to support the HCJ in promoting cooperation and strengthening ties with the ENCJ. In June 2017, the project supported participation of HCJ Chair Ihor Benedysiuk in the General Assembly of the ENC in Paris, France at which Mr. Benedysiuk participated in the meetings between the ENCJ and leaders of judicial councils from candidate EU Member States. As a result of the visit, the HCJ leadership began building a dialogue on possible ways and objectives of cooperation between ENCJ and HCJ, and provided HCJ leadership an opportunity to learn about the experiences of councils for the judiciary from the EU Member States and candidate Member States in increasing public confidence in the judiciary and improving image of the judiciary. Further, Mr. Benedysiuk studied the ENCJ assessment of independence, accountability and quality of the judiciary in the EU Member States and candidates presented in the respective ENCJ Report 2016-2017. More information is available at: http://www.vru.gov.ua/news/2367.

In May, 2017, New Justice organized the workshop “Disciplinary Liability of Judges in Ukraine” for the members of the HCJ and the representatives of the HCJ Secretariat. International experts Reiko Callner (the United States), Judge Jose Manuel Cardoso (Portugal), Richard Hyde (the United States), and Tilman Hoppe (Germany) introduced the audience to international and European standards and best practices of judicial discipline and managing the conflicts of interest arising in judicial area. Participants discussed current challenges and problematic aspects of conducting preliminary screening of disciplinary complaints, preparation for consideration and adjudication of the disciplinary cases against judges. More information is available at: HCJ Chair Ihor Benedysiuk, New Justice experts and leadership at http://www.vru.gov.ua/news/2317. the Workshop “Disciplinary Liability of Judges in Ukraine” on May 25, 2017 in Kyiv. PHOTO: USAID New Justice Program

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 7

In an effort to assist the HCJ to effectively and efficiently perform its statutory authorities, New Justice involved local short-term expert Olena Ovcharenko to review the HCJ Rules of Procedure in light of the international standards of judicial independence, Constitution of Ukraine, the Laws on the Judiciary and Status of Judges and on the High Counci of Justice. The expert report contains more than 40 recommendations to improve the current provisions of the Rules of Procedure, and proposes new provisions to detail and specify respective HCJ powers. New Justice submitted the report to the HCJ for consideration, and will further monitor implementation of the expert recommendations into the HCJ Rules of Procedure.

Service of Inspectors. The Law on the High Council of Justice requires the HCJ to set up the Service of Inspectors to assist the HCJ members in performing their statutory obligations. In order to support the HCJ in launching the Services of Inspectors, and with a focus on judicial discipline procedure, New Justice local short-term expert Nataliya Akhtyrska reviewed and updated the curricula for initial and ongoing trainings of the HQC inspectors involved in the conducting disciplinary procedures against judges. Ms. Akhtyrska also performed a case law analysis with a particular focus on the criminal and administrative cases on corruption and related offences considered by Ukrainian courts of different levels during the period of July 2016 – June 2017, with the purpose to assess certainty and consistency in the application and interpretation of legal provisions and proportionality of imposed sanctions. Based on the results of this study, the expert developed training curriculum for judges on consideration of such cases and recommendations for the NSJ on organization of this training.

Gender Representation. New Justice facilitated the establishment of a working group on improving representation and leadership of women judges in judicial governance bodies and courts. The Head of the SJA Zenoviy Kholodniuk signed the relevant order No. 318 on December 23, 2016 (published on the SJA’s official web-page http://dsa.court.gov.ua/userfiles/318.pdf. New Justice gender expert Maryna Rudenko developed recommendations on improving judicial statistics for better gender disaggregated data collection. She also developed a brochure on leading women judges worldwide and in Ukraine. The brochure will guide representatives of the Ukrainian judiciary in both international best practices and Ukrainian experiences, thereby presenting examples of successful women in the judiciary. Ms. Rudenko also developed a draft gender index framework for the judiciary with quantitative and qualitative indicators to analyze gender mainstreaming in judicial reform.

Judicial selection. New Justice provided logistical support in organizing and conducting anonymous testing in February 2017. The project also engaged seven independent monitors. The monitoring experts provided recommendations to the HQC to improve case study procedures, and the HQC considered a number of the recommendations including how to better organize the process and provide more comfortable conditions to the candidates for testing. The monitors developed a report with recommendations for the HQC to improve procedures, in particular: • Implement the internal quality assurance system (internal audit) of test materials and procedures for conducting tests; on the basis of the results of each test session, to prepare and publish a report with statistical and analytical materials, which will be placed in open access on the HQC’s webpage; • Implement an external quality assurance system for test materials and testing procedures (external audit) and regular accreditation by international quality assurance agencies for standardized testing. • Standardize the procedures for creation and maintenance of the Bank of test items and to provide the process of documenting the whole cycle of test items development.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 8

• Identify and implement a model of test items piloting as a tool for testing quality assurance etc.

In April 2017, New Justice conducted a training on interviewing techniques to include in the judicial selection process for HQC members. Participants were trained in basic techniques of asking questions during interviews, learned how to distinguish bias and stereotypes in the selection process, and to identify and assess knowledge and skills. The HQC also requested New Justice support in standardizing and improving tools for the judicial selection and evaluation process. New Justice engaged experts in psychology, testing, and standardization to pilot tests and results processing. In order to safeguard the validity and quality standardization, New Justice cooperated with the National School of Judges (NSJ) to form a group of judges undergoing professional trainings in NSJ and its five regional divisions.

The new Law provides for establishing the PIC with the purpose of assisting the HQC in determining whether a judge (a judicial candidate) meets the professional ethics and integrity criteria as part of qualifications evaluation. New Justice brought together members of the PIC, foreign judges, and international experts to attend “A New Look at Judicial Self-Governance” conference to discuss issues surrounding the PIC’s scope of authorities and functioning processes. Participants discussed issues and lessons learned from the international experience regarding the public involvement in the judicial selection and evaluation processes, the criteria for evaluating integrity, regulations and procedures of PIC activity. Members of the PIC agreed with experts’ recommendations a detailed framework for PIC’s activity to make the process clear and transparent.

PIC Operations. On March 21, 2017, New Justice jointly with the All-Ukrainian NGO ”Ukrainian Bar Association”, and the Council of Europe project ”Support to the Implementation of the Judicial Reform in Ukraine” conducted a discussion on current issues and challenges in functioning of the PIC. Representatives of the HQC, PIC, HCJ, COJ, judges, academics, representatives of NGOs and international organizations participated in the discussion. Participants discussed European and international practices and national legislation regarding professional ethics and integrity as criteria of judicial competences, exchanged the views on the algorithm of gathering and processing of information by the PIC, as well as ways of cooperation between the PIC and the HQC. Judicial expert Pim Albers provided a video-presentation on “Criteria of Professional Ethics and Integrity: European and International Best Practices and Lessons Learned”. In May 2017, international expert Pim Albers provided recommendations to the PIC and HQC to improve its operations and communication based on review of the legislation, PIC's Rules of Procedure and the Qualifications Methodology applied by the HQC, and his observations from an April 2017 Ukrainian Bar Association roundtable event and closed meeting related to the issues of PIC's communication with judicial candidates and conflict of interests.

In August 2017, the USAID New Justice Program supported the HQC and PIC in conducting a joint meeting on the “Selection of Judicial Candidates to the Supreme Court: Experience of HQC and PIC Cooperation: Lessons Learned and Next Steps”. The meeting focused on: (1) the results and impact of the PIC in support of the HQC-led selection process for the Supreme Court; (2) opportunities for further PIC participation in the HQC qualification evaluation of sitting judges and competitive selection of new judges; and (3) gaps in legislation that should be addressed regarding PIC operations. Recommendations provided during discussion: • Develop unified approach in preparing PIC opinions. • Improve PIC’s internal regulations, particularly related to procedures for decision- making and avoiding conflict of interest.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 9

• Conduct regular meetings and discussions between PIC and HQC to reach consensus on key issues and build constructive communication, including developing a common vision for cooperation. • Build clear approach to communications to avoid uncoordinated statements by PIC members in favour of a unified and agreed upon PIC position. • Promote amendment to laws and improve regulations regarding PIC operations. • Develop a common understanding of integrity. • Advocate for direct budget support for PIC, including premises and support staff as well as compensation for PIC members for their work.

Testing Center. To launch the NSJ Testing Center, the project engaged local testing expert Serhii Rakov to provide analysis and recommendations on the NSJ’s draft concept paper on creating effective business and administrative processes. With Mr. Rakov’s support, the NSJ established cooperation with the Ukrainian Center for Educational Quality Assessment (UCEQA). On June 1, 2017, the Rector of the NSJ Mykola Onishchuk signed an Order to create the TC as separate unit at the NSJ (by that time the TC functioned under the Department of Scientific and Methodological Support for the Activity of the HQC and HCJ). Later that month, New Justice supported the NSJ in conducting a seminar-training on “Testing Center of the National School of Judges: Development of Institutional Capacity.” Based on the training results TC developed Regulation on Testing Center and Regulation on the Bank of Test Items.

Judidcial self-governance. In cooperation with the EU Project “Support to Justice Sector Reforms in Ukraine”, the Norwegian Mission of Rule of Law Advisers to Ukraine (NORLAU) and the Canadian-Ukrainian Support to Judicial Reform Project, the project conducted the international conference “A New Look at Judicial Self-Governance” in December 2016. The conference resulted in the preparation of more than 20 recommendations aimed at strengthening judicial self-governance in Ukraine.

Explanation on Deviations in Implementation of the Work Plan

Some deviations from the original implementation plan were caused by the fact that most of the stakeholders’ attention was developed to the improve and develop of the legislative framework for the justice sector. The key stakeholders and actors were highly involved in the process which resulted in the delays with the implementation and review of the initial New Justice working plans. The other challenge was caused by the long approval process for the SAF manual. Now, this activity is on the way with the three grantees for the regional information campaigns competitively selected and launching their activity.

Self-government work was paralyzed due to organization of the Congress of Judges and the Supreme Court selection, and COJ members decided not to commit themselves to any new initiatives. Therefore, on September 28 New Justice conducted a meeting with COJ leadership in order to discuss its needs and present the ideas of further cooperation. At this meeting, the COJ committed itself to implementation of all the joint activities that were shifted to the next year and approving the respective action plan.

New Justice postponed activities related public information to increase court users to awareness about rules and mechanisms of reporting corruption in the courts, violation of judicial ethics, and illegal conduct of judges, judicial personnel and advocates, as well as on protection and incentive mechanisms for individuals who report. These activities are postponed until New Justice completes the survey among the court staff which is currently underway.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 10

OBJECTIVE 2: ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY OF THE JUDICIARY TO CITIZENS AND THE RULE OF LAW INCREASED Current Status of Affairs

Judicial accountability and transparency are the counterweights to judicial independence, and New Justice partner CSOs work together to hold the judiciary accountable to citizens. New Justice builds upon the achievements of the predecessor USAID FAIR Justice Project to support CSO monitoring of courts and judicial institutions, conduct public awareness campaigns, and develop judicial reform policy proposals.

In Program Year One, New Justice conducted a deeper assessment of fourteen partner CSOs’ capacity to bridge the gap between justice sector institutions and the community, facilitate dialogue for result-oriented monitoring, and advocate for increased effectiveness of GOU activities on justice sector reforms. This activity is linked to the Program grant selection process, both through the annual program statement (APS) and through specific request for application (RFA) rounds on monitoring progress related to vetting judges and CSO monitoring and advocacy for better human rights protection. The assessment focused on three key topics: a) partner CSOs’ available expertise for judicial reform issues and ability to utilize such expertise in practice; b) existing formal linkages between partner CSOs and GOU along with opportunities to strengthen and expand these linkages; and c) study of partner CSO organizational capacity and sustainability using the USAID CSO Sustainability Index tool. The assessment findings, conclusions and recommendations served as a base for the ongoing design of an on-line training program for Program partner CSOs on increasing their organizational capacity, financial viability, advocacy skills and efficiency of service provision to constituents.

Key Achievements to Date

Professional associations and bar associations increase capacity for self-regulation and professional standards among members. New Justice worked to improve the legislative framework regarding self-regulation, self-governance and professional standards of the professional associations and bar associations. New Justice engaged international experts Robert A. Hawley and Luba Zimanova Beardsley, who developed a comprehensive analysis of the current legal framework for the bar and draft legislative amendments to ensure compliance with international and European standards and best practices. Mr. Hawley focused on the issues of governing the legal profession, its independence and responsibility, the organization and limits of self-governance bodies, guarantees of due process during disciplinary procedures, attorney-client privilege guarantees, and professional responsibility and ethics. The expert’s recommendations were translated and shared with the working group and other interested stakeholders.

Vetting of judges and lustration of public officials. New Justice selected a grantee – Civil Lustration Committee (CLC) NGO - to implement the “Monitoring of the Progress Related to the Vetting of Judges and Lustration of Public Officials” activity. The grantee concluding monitoring and analysis of the progress in vetting of judges and lustration of public officials, including possible violations of lustration laws and human rights. CLC will assess whether vetting and lustration processes were strictly followed by institutions responsible for the vetting and lustration of judges and public officials.

Conflict of interest awareness. To further support corruption prevention efforts of the Ukrainian Judiciary, New Justice involved local well-known expert Mr. Mykola Khavronyuk who analyzed effectiveness of the Methodology on Conflict of Interest when covering judges and court personnel. The expert identified numerous gaps in the Methodology including absence of

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 11

effective mechanisms of conflict of interest identification, notification, and guidance on how to The awareness about conflict of respond to specific conflicts. On March 30, 2017, interest keep growing among the expert’s findings were presented at the judges as proved by the following "Judiciary Free from Corruption" round table to statistics: in 2015 only 15 judges the leadership of the COJ, SJA, HQC and applied to the COJ requesting representatives of the HCJ, NACP, and NSJ. Based guidelines on the conflict of on the discussion, participants agreed that the COJ interest related situation judges and HCJ should develop joint guidance to cover found themselves in. In 2016 the the above-listed problems. number of the requests has grown more than four times Additionally, New Justice expert Dr. Tilman Hoppe reaching 96 applications of developed the Report on the Conflict of Interest in judges. the Justice Sector of Ukraine that was presented during the expert’s discussion “Managing Conflict — VALENTINA SIMONENKO, of Interest in the Justice Sector” on May 26, 2017. HEAD OF THE COJ Members of the COJ, leadership authorized personnel of the HQC, and representatives of the NSJ participated in the event. In his research, Mr. Hoppe concluded that the conflict of interest regulation for the Ukrainian judiciary is a complex, six-layered construct, and is time-consuming to only research and review the various norms, let alone to fully grasp their legal cross-effects. As a consequence, the different norms do not always fully align. Thus, one main recommendation is to streamline the current body of laws, ideally by eliminating any overlapping or disposable norm as well as any superfluous regulatory layer.

Corruption perception and risks assessment. To enhance understanding regarding broader corruption risks in the judiciary, New Justice European expert Victoria Jennett conducted an analysis of the corruption-related risks in the justice sector by completing a comprehensive study of anti-corruption and judiciary related legislation. She also conducted a field study of the context by meeting with members of the HCJ and HQC, MPs, Deputy Minister of Justice, members of the COJ, representatives of the NSJ and NABU, members of the Public Councils of the NACP and NABU, judges, representatives of the Presidential Administration and leading NGOs in the area such as Transparency International Ukraine, as well as other donors. Outcomes of the research were presented during the expert discussion “Corruption Perception and Risks Assessment in the Judiciary. An Effective Solution – the Launch of the Anticorruption Court?” jointly organized by New Justice and Transparency International Ukraine. At the same time, the results of the survey of Ukrainian citizens regarding judicial independence and accountability and corruption in the judiciary were presented. The survey showed that 80% of respondents consider corruption as the biggest threat to Ukrainian democracy. However 42% of citizens think that bribery and other similar corruptive practices are common place phenomena in Ukraine and are therefore acceptable, while 20% of respondents were not willing to refuse corruptive mechanisms to resolve personal problems.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 12

HCJ training. To support HCJ in its new capacity of advisory body to the Parliament in reviewing judiciary related bills, New Justice conducted a training on “Analysis of the Draft Laws and Advisory Opinion Writing” for the members and authorized personnel of the Council. Lead trainer Sanja Popovic, a legislation drafting and analyzing expert from Canada, taught participants a methodology of bills evaluation and analysis based on gender and New Justice Anti-Corruption Expert Victoria Jennett presents the budget factors, possible influence outcomes of the analysis of the corruption risks in the Ukrainian on courts’ load, and practice of judiciary during the expert discussion “Corruption Perception and the European Court of Human Risks Assessment in the Judiciary. An Effective Solution – the Launch of the Anticorruption Court?”, September 27, 2017. PHOTO: USAID Rights. The trainer provided New Justice Program participants with a sequence of steps to be taken in advisory opinions development during the practical part of the training where trainees were asked to assemble opinions on a mock draft law. As a result of this event, participants obtained practical skills in writing consultative opinions on draft laws on the establishment, reorganization or liquidation of courts, judiciary, and the status of judges to be provided to the Parliament.

Explanation on Deviations in Implementation of the Work Plan

A public awareness campaign that aimed to inform and decrease levels of public tolerance to corruption in the Ukrainian justice sector was postponed to Year II. Per expert recommendation, the campaign was postponed to avoid confusion with an ongoing survey regarding corruption perception. Thus, New Justice decided to first complete the survey and later design and launch the anti-corruption awareness campaign based on the survey’s results.

In June 2017, the National Bar Association of Ukraine adopted the new version of the Code of Ethical Conduct for the lawyers. Accordingly, New Justice postponed its activity regarding the commentary to the Code with respect to the process of development and adoption of the document.

New Justice also experienced a delay in announcing a request for applicants (RFA) for a grant to analyze the results of CRC surveys focusing on implementing CSO-developed recommendations by courts and judicial institutions, and grant a RFA to support implementation of user satisfaction (CRC) surveys in courts that did not participate in previous programs. New Justice planned these two RFAs for Program Year One to analyze and develop CRC surveys in courts and judicial insitutions. but further earned that as part of judicial reform implementation, State Judicial Administration (SJA) is working on changing court mapping of Ukraine by way of consolidating smaller local first instance courts into larger courts with increased geographic coverage. Changing court mapping means that many of courts where CRC surveys took place in the recent years will no longer exist and new courts may be established. Accordingly, New Justice decided to postpone CRC activities until the new court map is known.

OBJECTIVE 3: ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE ENHANCED

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 13

Current Status of Affairs

In October 2017, Parliament passed new versions of all the procedural codes of Ukraine in one law. Under the new codes, the scope of application of electronic tools by Ukrainian courts has been significantly broadened: all interactions between the court user and the court are allowed in electronic format, including e-filing, video conferencing, and document exchange between the courts and other state institutions. New Justice expects these amendments to have a significant impact on court administration as a whole, as it will entail the revision of most existing paper- based court procedures, including those not directly linked with the consideration of cases.

In October 2016, two major laws on private enforcement reform, namely the Law on the Bodies and Persons Authorized to Enforce Court Decisions and Decisions of Other Bodies and the Law on Enforcement Proceedings, came in force. Also, in the last project year, the first candidates for the position of private enforcement agents (PEAs) completed training and examination, and were certified. Following the requirements of the laws cited above, Ministry of Justice of Ukraine and PEAs themselves aimed to establish private enforcers self-governing institutions.

Strengthening of the National School of Judges of Ukraine capacity to train judges, court staff, and candidates for judicial position. New Justice closely cooperated with NSJ to develop training programs for judges, court staff, and candidates for judicial position. The program will provide each Supreme Court justice with a set of manuals and publications produced under the FAIR and New Justice projects. The materials include tools and resources on such topics as Judicial Opinion Writing, Commentary to the Judicial Ethics Code, Judges’ Book, Court and Community Communication, European and International Standards in the Judiciary, and Ukrainian Translation of the Venice Commission Rule of Law Checklist. New Justice, jointly with the Michigan State University, initiated designing a Chief Judges Leadership and Management Training Comprehensive Curriculum, Mentoring Training Program for Chief Judges, and Chief Judges and Court Administrators Joint Executive Education.

Improvement of framework for mediation in consistency with international best practices. In October 2017, the Parliament of Ukraine adopted the Law on Amending Commercial Procedural Code, Civil Procedural Code, Code on Administrative Adjudication and other legislation acts (No. 6232). Each of the codes contains the norm of settlement of a dispute with the participation of a judge before the beginning of the examination of a case on its merits, order of the settlement, and its terms. Also, the draft Law on Mediation passed the first reading. New Justice is assisting Ukrainian stakeholders in promoting a conflict resolution policy, and in development of a modern regulatory framework for ADR and mediation in particular.

During the reporting period, over 80 Judicial Administration Certificate Program graduates of 2013, 2015, and 2016 shared their experience, approaches, and results on capstone project implementation in their courts as well as developed action plans for improvement of the court administration profession in Ukraine. The action plans will serve as an assessment of what the graduates believe needs to be accomplished for the sustainability of the profession and the advancement of court reform. They will be used during the strategic planning process that New Justice will start in 2018.

Also, New Justice supported participation of eight court administrators for participation at the IACA Eighth International Conference, in Arlington, VA in July 2017. Participants learned international best practices in court administration, equal access to justice, court governance, technology, public trust and outreach, educational development, court budget and financing, caseflow management, and other issues critical to the effective operations of the judiciary.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 14

Participants were also able to attend the District of Columbia Superior Court, where they observed accessible features of the court premises and learned about ensuring access to justice for people with disabilities, advanced technology use in courts, and professional growth of the court staff. As a result of participation, court administrators from Ukraine broadened their understanding of access to justice for people with disabilities and will apply new knowledge in Ukraine, including training all court staff on how to identify disabilities and respond to them, purchasing equipment that allows the disabled to type their message instead of waiting for the sign language interpreter to arrive and tools allowing to have sign language interpretation remotely.

The delegation consisted of representatives of Ukrainian NGO Institute of Court Management (ICM) who shared their knowledge and experience through the ICM NGO news letter with their Ukrainian court administrators upon return to Ukraine. In addition, board members of the ICM NGO participated in Leadership workshop conducted for IACA member organizations to strengthen their leadership skills and share experience with their counterparts from other countries.

Key Achievements to Date

In order to support the current plans for court mapping reform, New Justice translated and provided to the SJA the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) recommendations on court mapping, which lay out the basic principles for how this process should take place. Based on CEPEJ principles, the SJA prepared draft proposed changes to the court map of Ukraine and then discussed them with key stakeholders and international Kostyantyn Krasovskiy, Head of the Main Department for Legal experts at the Roundtable Court Policy of the Presidential Administration giving opening remarks at the Mapping: Challenges and Way Roundtable Court Mapping: Challenges and Way Forward, October Forward organized with New 17, 2017. PHOTO: USAID New Justice Program Justice support on October 17- 18, 2017. The Roundtable resulted in the preparation of a number of recommendations on moving forward, including the need to develop clear goals and objectives, update and revise some of the criteria for court consolidation, and establish a strong communications plan.

In order to support Ukraine’s judiciary in its transition to a paperless court environment, New Justice supported two study visits for members of the HCJ, SJA, judges and court staff. In November 2016, New Justice jointly with NORLAU conducted the “Experience of Implementing e-Justice Tools in the Judicial System of Bosnia and Herzegovina” study visit. The participants studied e-justice solutions currently available in Bosnia and Herzegovina that support the work of justice sector institutions, including electronic case management, performance management, statistical reporting, and remote access to case files and communications.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 15

New Justice supported the study visit “Experience of Implementing e-Justice Tools in the Judicial System of Moldova,” which was conducted April 2017. During the study visit, HCJ members and SJA technical staff learned about the experience of Moldova in the area of court automation, including lessons learned and achieved results. As a result of the study visits, the HCJ requested New Justice assistance in conducting an analysis of its business processes and transitioning to a paperless environment. The HCJ and HCJ Chair Ihor Benedysiuk signing Cooperation Agreement with SJA also asked New Justice to conduct Victor MIcu, SCM President on April 6, 2017 in Chisinau, Moldova. an analysis of the business processes of PHOTO: USAID New Justice Program the courts of all levels and jurisdictions. In response, New Justice prepared a ToR to complete this work, and plans to release an RFP for the analysis of HCJ business processes in November 2017. In addition, based on the Moldovan experience with regard to ensuring coordination of the transition to electronic format, the HCJ conducted a meeting with the State Agency for Electronic Governance of Ukraine, and reached an agreement with regard to joint activities in the area of court automation.

During the reporting period, New Justice supported the HCJ’s plans to digitalize its document flow in a way similar to the e-Court pilot project implemented by the USAID FAIR Justice project in Odesa via the procurement of hardware (high-speed scanners, printers, work stations, and laptops) for HCJ secretarial staff and HCJ members. This gave HCJ members the possibility to work with documents in digital format during HCJ meetings, including disciplinary hearings.

As part of its APS solicitation New Justice selected the Association of Investigative Judges of Ukraine to conduct a series of educational events based in Odesa oblast for judges and court staff from around the country to make them aware of the successful implementation of the “e- Court” pilot project and promote similar initiatives countrywide. In addition, some of the regional judicial forums planned under the grant program of the Association for Development of Judicial Self-Governance of Ukraine will be devoted to court administration, including best practices of implementing e-tools into the work of courts. New Justice expects both programs to begin in 2017.

In order to build the capacity of courts in judicial budgeting, financial management, and internal controls in line with recent changes to the legislation, New Justice conducted a two-day seminar for court accountants in July. The seminar hosted over 90 court accountants from courts of different jurisdictions and levels, and included training modules aimed at improving internal audit and accounting procedures in courts, as well as raising awareness of court accountants on the new requirements of anti-corruption legislation, especially the use of the ProZorro system.

In order to support reform of the private enforcement, New Justice explored international practices and lessons learned in launching bailiffs’ professions in order to select well suitable for

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 16

Ukraine standards. In April, the first 210 candidates to the PEA position successfully completed the training at the MOJ Institute of Law and Postal Education.

Welcoming the professionals New Justice jointly with the OSCE Program Coordinator in Ukraine, EU "Support to Justice Sector Reforms in Ukraine" Project, Commercial Law Center, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and International

Daniel Ryan, Deputy Director of the USAID Democracy and Development Law Organization Governance Office in Ukraine delivers welcoming remarks to the conducted First International private enforcers at the International Conference "Setting Up Private Conference "Setting Up Private Enforcement Service: European Practices and Trends", July 7, 2017. Enforcement Service: European PHOTO: USAID New Justice Program Practices and Trends". During the event experts from the Netherlands, Poland, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Moldova, Georgia and Serbia shared their experiences of developing private enforcement services, best European practices, and provided recommendations on effective launching private enforcement service in Ukraine. Also, experts gave practical advices on organizing daily operations, implementing electronic case filing systems, progressive information searching methods, and basic tips on due process of establishing self-governing body - the Association of Private Enforcement Officers of Ukrainian. Additionally, first certified private enforcers got the opportunity to discuss with the Deputy Minister of Justice Serhiy Shkliar.

Based on the results of the conference, New Justice together with the international partners, contributed to the MOJ Round Table “Private Enforcement Agents: First Step in the Profession” conducted in July. During the event, agents could address questions directly to the Minister of Justice of Ukraine Pavlo Petrenko.

New Justice, in cooperation with the Commercial Law Center, OSCE, EU "Support to Justice Sector Reforms in

Minister of Justice Pavlo Petrenko answering PEAs questions during Ukraine" Project and other international the Round Table “Private Enforcement Agents: First Step in the partners, contributed to the Profession”, July 26, 2017. PHOTO: Commercial Law Center development of the initial draft of the Code of Ethics of the Private Enforcement Agents that was discussed during the respective expert discussion in September.

New Justice supported the NSJ in updating materials with FAIR and New Justice curricula regarding amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine and the Law on the Judiciary and Status of Judges of Ukraine, in particular the online Judicial Ethics course. After successfully passing the updated course from November 2016 through October 2017, 138 judges received certificates.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 17

In April, the HQC announced a competition to fill 600 vacant positions of local courts judges. Upon passing the admission exam, the successful candidates will complete the initial training in the NSJ in order to participate in further selection. As a part of the NSJ’s initial training program, the candidates will complete Judicial Opinion Writing Courses. New Justice supported the NSJ in development, piloting, and conducting a TOT of the next courses: Judicial Opinion Writing: General Aspects for All Jurisdictions; Judicial Opinion Writing in Commercial Cases; and Judicial Opining Writing in Civil Cases. 19, 25, and 24 judge-trainers received NSJ certificates after participation in TOT sessions for three topics.

In April, New Justice supported the NSJ with updating materials of the Criminal Proceedings Regarding Juveniles Course and in conducting a TOT on this course. The curriculum for the course was developed by the Canadian funded Ukraine Juvenile Justice Reform Project. Twenty- one judge-trainers received the NSJ certificates.

In June 2017, New Justice conducted an “Alternative Dispute Resolution and Courts” study visit to Washington, D.C. and New York, NY. The Ukrainian delegation included representatives of key stakeholders in the process of promoting ADR in Ukraine, including the HCJ, COJ, SJA, National Association of Mediators of Ukraine and Legal Development Network, as well as judges who have a strong interest in implementing ADR programs in their courts.

The delegation had the opportunity to learn about the structure, governance, and scope of justice related services provided by community centers, including their use of approaches like mediation and youth court, as well as their aims and objectives, including addressing the gap between community and government, increasing public trust in government and the judiciary, and supporting access to justice, especially for vulnerable groups. The participants identified best practices and lessons learned during the study visit, including promotion of ADR and mediation in courts which can be applied in Ukraine. In addition, the U.S. experience can also be used to strengthen ADR capacity and creating community justice centers in Ukraine.

Online Dispute Resolution. In September, New Justice hosted a conference on ODR and the Courts: Improving Access to Justice in Ukraine. More than 200 participants met to (1) get acquainted with ODR as a means to reduce court caseloads, promote timely resolution of disputes, and increase public satisfaction and engagement; (2) discuss the impact, best practices, and lessons learned in implementing ODR programs in Canada, Europe and the United States; (3) discuss the challenges, opportunities, and best fit for introducing ODR in Ukraine; and (4) develop recommendations and next steps for advancing ODR in Ukraine. As a result of the conference, the participants developed more than 50 recommendations to further promote the use of ODR.

From August to October 2017, the USAID New Justice Program supported the National Association of Mediators of Ukraine in conducting 10 regional discussions of a draft Code of Conduct for Mediators aimed at joining efforts of different regional mediators’ organizations to develop unified set of standards to govern the conduct of a mediators’ community and ensure integrity in this community. Having a specific Code of Ethics outlining standards and expectations for mediators will help to avoid inadvertent, yet potentially harmful, missteps, and will enhance public trust and form culture for wider use of mediation as an alternative dispute resolution method. Approximately 320 mediators, lawyers, advocates, judges, representatives of local city and regional councils, social services centers, business, law schools, and NGOs participated in the discussions. As a result of these discussions, the Draft Code of Conduct for Mediators will be finalized and presented to the mediators’ community during the all-Ukrainian conference preliminarily scheduled for December 2017.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 18

During the reunion of the Judicial Administration Certificate Program, graduates identified the following strategic issues for court administration and developed action plans to address them: learn about the projects, initiatives, and innovations implemented by other graduates including successes, failures, lessons-learned, and best practices; advance the profession of court administration; clarify and achieve legal authorization related to the level of autonomy, span of authority and control, and designated responsibilities of the chief of staff; develop effective and mutually respectful relationships with chief judges for the purpose of advancing public trust and confidence in the courts.

Also, court administrators determined the following professional needs to be addressed in strategic plan development for court administration that New Justice plan to support in future: the legal status, authority, responsibilities, autonomy, and span of control of court administrators (i.e., chiefs of staff) remains unclear and in some cases contradictory; advancing court administration as a recognized profession is closely tied to the first priority and must be accomplished if the courts wish to secure and keep the best employees; diffusing innovation was a top priority for the graduates and seems appropriate for the New Justice Program to undertake; building a mutually beneficial relationship between the chief judge and court administrator is absolutely critical if the courts are ever to achieve expert management; creating an academic home for court administration that results in degrees and certificates, court administrators will require continuing education in the form of conferences, seminars, workshops, regional meetings.

As result of participation in IACA Eighth International Conference Court, administrators would like to apply the following ideas in Ukriane: projects on teaching children of school age how to respect courts, not to be afraid of courts though production of printing and video materials; create judicial information center; set a working group on developing judicial standards related to corporate design; create mechanism on dissemination of innovation among courts; develop projects on security issues; develop public resource centers; implement initiatives on promoting participatory budgets in Ukraine; create law libraries; use of court performance framework to achieve court excellence; conduct hackathon gathering court staff and IT developers; translate NACM core into Ukraine to increase professional development of court staff; conduct Trauma Awareness and Resilience Strategies for Work and Life training for judges from ATO bordering area as well as for judges from the rest regions of Ukraine since work in courts include dealing with difficult cases, violence, threats, hurt people. New Justice will consider opportunity to support implementation of the above-mentioned ideas. One of the delegation participant Ivan Babych, Chief of Staff from Rivne district Court of Rivne Oblast has already implemented the idea on launching electronic document flow in his courts. The court purchased computers and high-speed scanner to transfer all documentation into electronic format and use it in their work with deferent agencies and litigants.

Explanation on Deviations in Implementation of the Work Plan

As part of the conference “A New Look at Judicial Self-Governance” described above, New Justice conducted the first presentation of the International Framework for Judicial Support Excellence (IFJSE) for members of the HCJ, COJ, SJA, and other judicial institutions, aiming to pilot the framework in Ukraine during Year 1. However, due to the lack of buy-in on the part of the State Judicial Administration, New Justice was forced to delay the work related to the IFJSE. Nevertheless, In October 2017 the SJA changed its position, requesting New Justice’s assistance in conducting an internal and external evaluation of the quality of its services provided to the courts. New Justice plans to complete this process by the end of 2017.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 19

In order to develop the Terms of Reference for the BPA for the HCJ, New Justice identified a local expert, however, since this assignment required her to receive access to internal procedures of the HCJ, the HCJ chose to conduct its own background check on her, which took several months to complete. As a result, the development of the TOR began much later than planned. New Justice plans to announce a tender for the BPA in early November this year.

Numerous activities under this Objective scheduled for Year I depend on the PEAs. Due to delays in certification of the first PEAs, the deadline for creation of the association is also delayed. The association is expected to be established at the First National Conference of PEAs scheduled in November 2017. New Justice continues to cooperate with other donors, including OSCE and EU, to develop guidance on due process of association establishment and operation, drafts of the other vitally important for the association documents, such as Regulation on PEAs Association, and Code of PEA Ethics.

New Justice cancelled a planned activity on design and implementation of the academic certificate course on judicial administration between Karazin Kharkiv National University and Michigan State University. In September, MSU informed that new leadership of the university was reviewing every program including the Judicial Administration Program. In addition, Dr. Conner, who runs the program, will leave MSU in June 2018. The Judicial Administration Program is unique in its design and delivery can only be directed by a small group of individuals. Despite uncertainty regarding MSU’s involvement, New Justice is still considering the opportunity to design and implement academic certificate course on judicial administration at Karazin Kharkiv National University by engaging international experts in 2018.

OBJECTIVE 4: QUALITY OF LEGAL EDUCATION STRENGTHENED New Justice built momentum for comprehensive legal education reform through demand-driven cooperation and coordination of efforts with the Ministry of Education and Science (MOE), the Ministry of Justice (MOJ), the Verkhovana Rada (Parliament), law schools, and bar associations, contributing to enhancing legal education quality in line with international and European standards and best practices as related to the implementation of the GOU Priority Action Plan for 2017 and the Mid-Term Priority Action Plan till 2020.

Current Status of Affairs

National Strategy and Standards for Legal Education and Accreditation. New Justice assisted the MOE and the MOJ in developing the draft Legal Education Reform Concept Paper (LERCP) through conducting (a) regional stakeholder discussions of the draft LERCP in Kharkiv, Chernivtsi, Dnipro, Vinnitsia, and Lviv that brought together over 200 policy-makers, law school administrators, faculty, students, and representatives of bar associations, (b) expert analysis of stakeholder feedback with recommendations to amend the draft LERCP and outline legal education reform measures, their sequence, timing, and the institutions responsible for their implementation and monitoring, (c) a week-long legal education study visit to the U.S. for 12 key policy-makers, law school administrators and opinion leaders who obtained a comprehensive picture of US policies and processes aimed at legal education quality assurance, identified gaps in Ukraine’s legal education system, and designed innovative solutions to address the current issues with legal education in Ukraine. These efforts resulted in strengthening of a coalition of legal education reform stakeholders and revival of the MOE-MOJ Working Group on Legal Education Reform.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 20

New Justice supported the MOE in developing the draft BA Legal Education Standard by exposing the membership of the MOE Methodological Commission on Developing Standards for Legal Education to respective international standards and best practices. The MOE published the draft BA Legal Education Standard on its website for the public to provide their feedback before finalizing the draft.

New Justice also assisted the MOE in improving the draft Standards for Licensing of HEIs in line with the Ukrainian delegation discusses American Bar Association (ABA) Standards and Guidelines for Quality standards for accreditation and approval of law schools with the Assurance in the European Higher leadership of ABA Section on Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar on August 28, 2017 in Washington, D.C, U.S. Education Area (ESG 2015), outlining PHOTO: New Justice requirements for internal strategies, policies, procedures, and practices as to higher education quality and academic integrity assurance. The MOE designed the draft Standards for Licensing of HEIs, however, it was too broad and devoid of specific requirements for law schools. To address this issue, New Justice advocated for developing separate requirements for accreditation of law schools.

Delineation of Legal Education and Police Education. New Justice supported the MOE and the MOJ to analyze the draft Cabinet of Ministers' Decree amending the Cabinet Decree on the Fields of Knowledge and Specialties of April 29, 2015 №266. New Justice advised both ministries to draw upon the international standards of education classification for merging the specialties 081 "Law" and 293 "International Law" into one field of knowledge "Law" and not allowing graduates with the specialty 262 "Law Enforcement" to enter the legal profession.

Prime Minister Groisman signed the Cabinet Decree housing the "International Law" specialty in the field of knowledge "International Relations", allowing graduates with this specialty to enter the legal profession, and not allowing graduates with the "Law Enforcement" specialty to do the same.

Further, New Justice together with other international donor organizations and projects, including the OSCE Project Coordinator in Ukraine, the Council of Europe Office in Ukraine, the EU Advisory Mission in Ukraine, and the Embassy of Canada to Ukraine signed and sent a joint letter to Minister of Interior Arsen Avakov, Minister of Education and Science Liliia Hrynevych, and Minister of Justice Pavlo Petrenko, outlining a common donor community vision of legal education reform and professional police education reforms going forward as equally important, yet completely separate reforms.

Quality Assurance Frameworks for Law Schools. New Justice amended the Methodology for External, Independent, On-site Assessment of Legal Education Quality (Methodology) in line with ESG 2015 and successfully tested it at Odesa Law Academy's School of Advocacy. New Justice cooperation with this law school resulted in the Assessment Report with Recommendations for Strengthening Legal Education Quality. With New Justice support, the assessed law school

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 21

developed its Action Plan to implement the expert recommendations. Building on this success, New Justice secured commitment of Ukraine's largest law school, namely the Yaroslav Mudryi Law University, to undergo a similar assessment in October – November 2017. New Justice also trained 19 representatives of the MOE, the State Inspection of HEIs, the National Agency for Higher Education Quality Assurance, administrators and faculty of leading law schools across Ukraine on the Methodology implementation, building the participants' capacity to develop law school education quality assurance systems and use the Methodology as a tool to improve legal education quality nationwide in line with the amendments regarding education quality and academic integrity assurance introduced to the Law "On Higher Education" on September 5, 2017.

Legal Education Quality Assurance Units in Odesa Law Academy and the Yuri Fedkovych Chernivtsi Law School established and functioning with New Justice's support. New Justice also advocated for other leading law schools to follow suit. In particular, New Justice's Protocol of Cooperation with the Yaroslav Mudryi Law University will enable establishment of a similar unit at the law school.

Practice-oriented and Skills-based Instruction and Curriculum. New Justice trained 18 faculty and administrators from ten leading law schools on developing practice-oriented and skills-based simulation criminal law and procedure courses. This effort resulted in (a) the simulation course concept, (b) syllabus layout, (c) expert report with recommendations for such a course implementation, and (d) leading law schools, in particular the Taras Shevchenko Kyiv Law School, made commitments to introduce such a course in formal curricula in 2018. New Justice jointly with the OSCE Project Coordinator in Ukraine, and Ukrainian Legal Aid Foundation (ULAF) supported the Association of Legal Clinics of Ukraine in organizing the National Client Consultation Competition of Legal Clinics for over 40 law students as well as supported the team-winner in representing Ukraine at the Brown Mosten International Client Consultation Competition in Canterbury, UK.

New Justice also provided targeted support to Ukrainian law students by sponsoring the participation of two teams of seven students in total representing two leading law schools in an international moot court on European Union law and World Trade Organization law in Gothenburg, Sweden, and Cluj-Napoca, Romania. New Justice used student teams' reports on the results of their participation and the lessons they learned during the competitions to promote practice-oriented and skills-based legal education. New Justice also supported the Young Lawyer’s Coordination Council under the auspices of the MOJ and the European University in conducting the 7th All-Ukrainian Winter Law School for over 80 law students, including internally displaced persons, from around Ukraine.

In the framework of the Rule of Law Lecture Series, New Justice, jointly with the Ukrainian Catholic University (UCU) Rule of Law Center, conducted seven public lectures on crosscutting rule of law issues related to legal reforms in a democratic society, engaging over 290 law students, academics, legal practitioners, and public officials who attended the events in dialogues with international experts, while a live broadcast attracted over 4,300 individual online viewers.

New Justice also assessed the modern teaching practices of rule of law courses in other countries in order to develop an outline of a rule of law certificate program. To this end, New Justice facilitated cooperation between an American and a Ukrainian university to design, implement, and evaluate a certificate program in Rule of Law (ROL Certificate Program). New Justice issued a Request for Proposals and in the next reporting period will select an American university to implement the program.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 22

Key Achievements to Date

New Justice assisted the MOE and the MOJ in implementing a mandatory, external, independent, standardized entrance exam (MEISEE) for master's degree programs in law nationwide. New Justice also successfully implemented an international online anticorruption course in cooperation with the Washington and Lee School of Law and four leading Ukrainian law schools. Please refer to the section "Success Stories" to learn more. In addition, New Justice amended the Methodology for External, Independent, On-site Assessment of Legal Education Quality in line with the ESG 2015, successfully tested it at Odesa Law Academy's School of Advocacy, produced the Assessment Report with Recommendations for Strengthening Legal Education Quality, and supported the development of the Action Plan to implement expert recommendations. Further, New Justice assisted two leading law schools, namely Odesa Law Academy and the Yuri Fedkovych Chernivtsi Law School, to establish and build capacity at their Legal Education Quality Assurance Units. New Justice also implemented the first ever in Ukraine nation-wide opinion survey of judges and justice sector personnel on legal education reform, which together with the data generated by the MEISEE implementation provided the MOE and the MOJ with important qualitative and quantitative data necessary to carry out a demand-driven and evidence-based policymaking to improve legal education in Ukraine.

New Justice jointly with OSCE and ULAF supported the Ministry of Education established Working Group on Improving the Model Regulation on Legal Clinics in Ukraine which included representatives of legal clinics, deans of law faculties, and members of the ALCU board. Working Group members approved the draft Model Regulation and the MOE sent it to the MOJ for review. In its turn, the MOJ shared comments to the document with MOE. Once the Working Group incorporates comments into the Draft Regulation, the MOJ will proceed with its official registration. New Justice also collaborated with the ULAF and the OSCE to support the ALCU in reviewing its strategic plan and developing an instrument for monitoring the legal clinics’ operations based on the Methodology for Independent On-site Legal Education Quality Assessment developed by FAIR and New Justice.

Explanation on Deviations in Implementation of the Work Plan

New Justice continued introducing Ukrainian stakeholders to the concept of judicial clerkship programs. Particularly, at public events attended by the representatives of COJ, SJA, HCJ, and law schools, New Justice opened a discussion about ways to improve the quality of legal education to better prepare law schools graduates for work in the judiciary. Representatives of the COJ, judges, and lawyers agreed that the current externships for law students are not efficient and do not prepare them for future work; therefore, the judicial The participants of the practical session on l Clinics from Ukraine clerkship program was considered to be on May 10-12, 2017 in Dnipro. PHOTO: USAID New Justice a positive prospective development. Program

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 23

However, due to the Congress of Judges of Ukraine which was held in March 2017 and the ongoing selection of Supreme Court Justices, judges and judicial institutions have delayed committing to new initiatives, so no significant programmatic activities took place during the reporting period. In order to revive this initiative, New Justice included the respective provisions in the Protocol of Cooperation with the COJ which will be signed in the upcoming reporting period.

OBJECTIVE 5: ACCESS TO JUSTICE EXPANDED AND HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTED Current Status of Affairs

Ukrainian citizens face significant obstacles in accessing fair, efficient, enforceable, and predictable justice. To address these challenges, New Justice works with GOU and civil society partners to increase access to justice to all citizens including the most vulnerable groups.

Removing physical, geobraphic, cultural, procedural, informational barriers to courts. New Justice builds upon achievements of its predecessor USAID FAIR Justice Project supporting a coalition of 20 CSOs representing several thousands of persons with disabilities to work together to improve access to justice for people with disabilities (PWDsP). The coalition expanded its monitoring access to courts and judicial services in nine oblasts including Donetsk Oblast, which neighbors the anti-terrorist operations (ATO) zone.

Increasing accessibility of e-justice. In its first year, New Justice assessed three pilot courts in Odesa Oblast, who implement e-justice components including electronic case filings, tracking, paperless (electronic) exchange within the courts and with stakeholders, witness proceedings through online video conferencing and others. The focus was accessibility of e-court services to citizens.

The assessment found that e-court improvements are well received by private practicing lawyers and GOU institutions (such as procesutor offices and police), more so than by ordinary citizens. In practice, current implementation of e-court services have not gone further than online court information and electronic court fees. To address this, New Justice has prepared set of 10 recommendations to its GOU partners on improving e-court accessibility.

Establishing Community Justice Centers (CJC) in Ukraine. New Justice began promoting a new model of citizen participation in sustainable development and improvement of the judiciary. This model is for Community Justice Centers (CJC) – non-for-profit charitable organizations managed and governed by all stakeholder representatives – CSO and community leaders, delegated representatives of justice sector, executive branch, and local businesses. This model has been successfully implemented in the U.S., Singapore, and several Latin America countries, where CJC is a powerful tool for collaboration between the judiciary and community providing a wide range of services to citizens.

CJC also implements grass-root initiatives to improve court functions and ensure accessibility to justice services for all citizens. In 2017 New Justice supported Ukrainian delegation visit to the Red Hook Community Justice Center in New York, NY. After returning from the study visit, the participants started preparing CJC concepts for Ukraine and promoting its idea with all branches of GOU.

Additionally, New Justice team members participated in the Rule of Law International Summit organized by Chemonics International in Dominican Republic. The summit provided an opportunity to its participants to visit and to study the experience of Community Justice Houses.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 24

The USAID Criminal Justice Strengthening Project in Dominican Republic currently supports eight such houses, which are focused on community security issues, including prevention of street crime and domestic violence. Dominican Community Justice Houses are also interested as they serve as referral points for citizens in order to solve issues.

Improving ability of judges to apply IHL provisions in considering conflict-related cases. In July 2017, USAID New Justice, in cooperation with the NSJ, and the USAID Human Rights in Action Program, conducted a roundtable “The Role of Courts in Guaranteeing Respect for Human Rights through International Humanitarian Law (IHL) Application”. During this event, the New Justice expert on International Humanitarian Law, President of the European Committee for Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Mykola Gnatovsky, presented recommendations on improving ability of judges to apply IHL in conflict-related court cases, based on the analysis of national court practice. The representatives of the Council of Judges, Ministry of Justice, national and international experts, and judges discussed the IHL provisions and their application in Ukraine in cases related to protecting the rights of persons affected by conflicts; key achievements and obstacles in IHL implementation by domestic courts, and learned about restorative and punitive justice approaches in conflict situations.

As a result of the discussion, participants developed recommendations on improving judges’ practices of applying IHL standards during cases in national courts. Following the recommendations, New Justice will develop the training program for judges on IHL application in considering conflict-related cases in the next reporting period.

Civil society monitoring and advocacy for human rights protection through the court. New Justice supported five CSOs to monitor enforcement of the law and protection of human rights by the court, create referral pathways among stakeholders for improving access to justice of the most vulnerable, raise judiciary and legal aid providers’ awareness on their role in protecting human rights; and to support human rights coalitions in advocating for better human rights protection through the court.

In addition, New Justice solicited five CSOs grant applications through APS to support innovative justice programs, to ensure the right to a public hearing and the principle of court trials transparency, to analyze court case law in ECHR article 6 application; and to promote access to justice for people with mental disabilities, elderly people and other disadvantaged communities in Ukraine.

Developing paralegal institute in Ukraine. In May, New Justice, in cooperation with the International Renaissance Foundation, organized a TOT on developing a paralegal institute in Ukraine. New Justice philology expert Ms. Nadya Trach conducted consultations with the trainers of the program and suggested the most appropriate term to be used for the position title with respect to paralegal servants in Ukraine. The recommendations will be widely disseminated during the next reporting period. Raising public awareness on human rights and access to justice. In June, the MOJ conducted a press briefing to announce the launch of the national information campaign I HAVE A RIGHT! Implemented with New Justice support, the campaign aims to raise public awareness about human rights and access to justice.

During the press briefing, Minister of Justice Pavlo Petrenko stated: “Our aim is to create a new legal culture in society that will ensure the sustainable development of Ukraine as a modern legal democratic state. The strategic goal of the long-term national program "I HAVE A RIGHT!" is raising awareness of Ukrainians about human rights and improve their ability to protect their

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 25

rights in various spheres of life”. USAID Acting Administrator Wade Warren and Deputy Minister of Justice Gia Getsadze also participated in the press briefing.

Developing professionalism of the MOJ managers. In March, New Justice conducted the MOJ leadership development retreat “Personal and Organizational Road to Change”. The objectives of the event were to define culture of the MOJ and its importance to employees’ leadership development and professional identity, to determine and develop participants’ individual change inspirations. Minister of Justice Pavlo Petrenko, Deputy Minister Gia Getsadze, Deputy Minister Pavlo The Minister of Justice Pavlo Petrenko, Deputy Minister of Justice Gia Getsadze and USAID Acting Administrator Wade Warren are Moroz, heads of the regional justice launching I HAVE A RIGHT! campaign on June 7, 2016 in Kyiv. offices and other key managers at the PHOTO: Ministry of Justice of Ukraine MOJ took part in the event. New Justice will continue to support the MOJ in developing professional capacity of its employees through conducting training program on strategic and crisis communications, reputation management and communicating with media during the next reporting period.

New Justice engaged local gender expert Maryna Rudenko prepared a report on access to justice for sexual and other forms of gender based violence (SGBV) victims affected by conflicts based on international experience, and provided recommendations for Ukraine. Also, during this reporting period, New Justice selected a grant application from La-Strada Ukraine NGO to implement an activity on improving legal assistance through strengthening capacities of free legal aid centers in protecting the rights of individuals who suffered from gender based violence.

Key Achievements to Date

During the period, USAID approved the New Justice Grant Policy Manual. Thus, the program will report on grant programs key achievements in the next reporting period.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 26

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

The New Justice results chart presented in Exhibit 1 of the Annex A to this report represents the strategy to achieve the program goal, “Independent, accountable, transparent and effective justice system that upholds the rule of law and is empowered to fight corruption.” Nove Pravosuddya will achieve 88 expected results (ERs), which will lead, in turn, to high-level changes in the justice system. These changes represent five program objectives and sixteen program sub- objectives. This comprehensive result flow process reflects anticipated achievements of implementing two important Ukrainian policies: 1) Ukraine’s Justice Sector Reform Strategy for 2015-2020 and 2) Strategy for Sustainable Development “Ukraine 2020”.

NEW JUSTICE APPROACH TO MANAGE PROGRAM PERFORMANCE New Justice uses a mix of quantitative and qualitative indicators; quantitative data can tell us what has changed, but qualitative data is needed to help us understand why changes have occurred and thus better tailor our interventions. Meanwhile, for management purposes we will transfer the qualitative indicators presented in the Annex A in indexed scores applying numerical scales to qualitative benchmarks. The qualitative indicators, where we use quantitative indexes, are developed based on the international tools for justice sector evaluation including 1) European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) Rule of Law Checklist, 2) European Network of Councils for Judiciary (ENCJ) basket of indicators for judicial independence and accountability, 3) European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) Check List for Promotion Efficiency and Quality of Justice and Courts, 4) International Framework for Judicial Support Excellence (IFJSE). In 2017, we commenced operating with indicators based on the Venice Commission Rule of Law Check List and ENCJ basket of indicators. We have not started using CEPEJ Check List and IFJSE due to longer than expected discussions regarding a common understanding of these documents and their provision by Ukrainian key stakeholders. Thus, the two latest international tools will start in the next year.

INVOLVING LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS IN PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT New Justice promotes a participatory approach to measuring program performance and achieving the program goal, objectives, sub-objectives, and key results. To ensure this approach, we established and host the Stakeholder Advisory Group (SAG) every six months; the group’s primary role is vetting and providing data for high level outcome indicators based on applying the international tools for justice sector development. These tools are described above. In addition, the SAG develops recommendations to New Justice and its partners on setting and revising annual and project-end targets, reviewing and approving semi-annual and annual actuals. The SAG includes all the program’s GOU counterparts, international donor representatives, and CSOs that actively participate in justice sector reform. The SAG reviews secondary data received from Ukrainian partners, and primary data obtained by the program from surveys of judges, judicial personnel, advocates and citizens and, further, extracts qualitative data for complex measure indicators. SAG also provides direction for further programming through review of monitoring and evaluation data to develop roadmaps for New Justice and its Ukrainian beneficiaries for effective actions, in order to achieve the goal, objectives and sub-objectives. Engaging these stakeholders from the outset will promote buy-in among our counterparts for program outcomes. This year we hosted two SAG meetings – in April 2017 and October 2017, right after the end of Program Year One. On the first meeting SAG worked with indicators for judicial independence and accountability based on ENCJ tools, and on the second meeting SAG introduced and collected baseline data for the ratio of Ukrainian judiciary compliance with

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 27

Venice Commission Rule of Law Check List – key complex indicator to measure New Justice Program goal.

In addition to hosting SAG, we promote use of performance indicators by our key counterparts. In 2017, we facilitated use of European Network of Councils for Judiciary Independence and Accountability Indicators by the High Council of Justice (HCJ). Use of these indicators in Ukraine revealed that Ukraine has good objective conditions for judicial independence (e.g. Constitutional and Legal framework as well as regulatory base to implement it), but the subjective judicial independence (e.g. how judges themselves perceive and perform their independence) remains an issue.

The second chart in the Annex A demonstrates the current status of judicial independence and accountability in Ukraine according to ENCJ indicators. According to these indicators, Ukraine has the lowest score for public perception of corruption in the judiciary, and the second lowest score for understandability of judicial proceedings for citizens. Ukrainian judiciary has a maximum score for availability of the Code of Judicial Ethics and very high score for judicial disciplinary measure. In the next program year, we will focus on improving understandability of proceedings and changing public perception of corruption in the judiciary, in order to improve overall scores for judicial independence and accountability.

2O17 SURVEYS AND THEIR SELECTED RESULTS In 2017, New Justice conducted a national public survey regarding public trust in the judiciary and other government branches, citizens awareness about the judicial reform, perception of corruption in the judiciary and readiness to report corruption practices. 2,268 respondents were interviewed, representing Ukraine by region, gender, and age. Key survey findings show that trust in the judiciary remains very low (only 12% of respondents), but has a slightly positive trend. In 2015, a similar survey conducted by New Justice Program predecessor – USAID FAIR Project indicated only 5% of Ukrainians trust in the judiciary. The 2017 survey also revealed that Ukrainian people’s tolerance to corruption remains high; approximately 30% of respondents reported that they can justify corruption in some situations. But, there are some positive improvements, because in 2015 this indicator was almost 50%.

New Justice conducted comprehensive national surveys of judges and legal professionals working in courts who are not judicial employees (e.g. advocates and prosecutors). The surveys measured judicial independence and accountability, corruption in the judiciary as perceived by professional legal community, and ability of justice sector personnel to resist corruption and report on it. The survey findings revealed existing issues of judicial and anti-corruption reform in Ukraine. The full report on 2017 New Justice Program indicator data is available in the Annex A.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 28

ADMINISTRATION AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Contract and Modifications. Chemonics International, Inc. signed the Contract No. AID- OAA-I-13-00032, Task Order AID-121-TO-16-00003 with USAID on September 27, 2016. This Task Order is under the Indefinite Quantity Contract (IQC) Number: AID- OAA-I-13-00032 with Chemonics International, Inc. The integral parts of the Task Order are two Annexes: Annex 1 – Request for Categorical Exclusion; Annex 2 – Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan.

On December 08, 2016, New Justice and USAID signed the Amendment of Solicitation / Modification of Contract No 1 reflecting provided by donor incremental funding, thereby increasing the total obligated amount.

Program Registration and Protocols of Cooperation / Intensions. In October 25, 2016, New Justice signed the Protocol of Cooperation with the SJA. The SJA submitted the letter of program support to the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of Ukraine (MOEDTU). On October 31, 2016, MOEDTU provided the program with its initial registration and issued the registration card No 3504 reflecting SJA as the program’s beneficiary and recipient.

During reporting period, New Justice entered into nine Protocols of Cooperation with the following key Ukrainian partners, including the High Qualifications Commission of Judges of Ukraine, the High Council of Justice, the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, the National School of Judges of Ukraine, the Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, the Ukrainian Catholic University, and the Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University additionally to the Protocol of Cooperation with SJA. These nine protocols include agreed upon areas for cooperation and outline responsibilities for implementing partners and New Justice. The program completed six re-registrations, which were reflected by the MOEDTU in the following registration cards: No 3504-01 dated January 27, 2017, No 3504-02 dated March 03, 2017, No 3504-03 dated May 22, 2017, No 3504-04 dated May 26, 2017, No 3504-05 dated June 20, 2017, and No 3504-06 dated July 26, 2017. The program’s registration card No 3504-06 dated July 26, 2017 reflects three beneficiaries (SJA, HCJ and MoJ) and seven recipients, except the Ukrainian Catholic University, and the Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University (in progrees).

Work Planning. The program prepared the initial Implementation Plan (Work Plan 1 (WP1)) for the period from October 1, 2016 to September 30, 2017, and Annual Implementation Plan (WP2) for the period from October 1, 2017 to September 30, 2018. Pursuant to Section Reporting Requirements of the Task Order, New Justice submitted the work plans to USAID and USAID approved WP1; WP2 is under USAID consideration.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 30

Program Monitoring by Beneficiary. Per SJA and HCJ’s requests, New Justice provided both beneficiaries with detailed reports on program activities with regard to activity for each objective for the 4th Quarter of 2016 and the first half of 2017 calendar year.

Staffing and Experts. During reporting period, Key personnel Mr. David Vaughn performed his duties as Chief of Party (COP) and Natalia Petrova – as Deputy Chief of Party (DCOP) pursuant to Section H of the Task Order. Starting from November 01, 2016, New Justice signed employment agreements with twenty-two former USAID FAIR Project employees. Before November 01, 2017, staff members performed their duties as services providers.

During implementation, New Justice hired new employees as follows: on December 05, 2017 – Svyatoslav Kutepov, Interpreter/Translator, on January 19, 2017 – Iryna Khomiak, Communications Assistant, on March 20, 2017 – Olena Silkina, Administrative Assistant, and on September 05, 2017 – Uliana Pashynna, Legal Advisor.

On September 28, 2017, Iryna Khomiak resigned the Program due to her education abroad.

During the period, New Justice involved the expertise of Short-Term Technical Assistance (STTA) Expatriates on paid basis, STTA Pro Bono Expatriates, and STTA Cooperative Country National (CCN) experts. The STTA Expatriates represented the following countries: U.S. Experts and Third Country National (TCN) Experts from the Netherlands, Georgia, Germany, Irish and British, Slovak Republic, UK, Austria, Slovak Republic, Canada, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, . New Justice obtained prior USAID approval for all STTA experts’ assignments, as well as for their international travel as needed.

On August 09, 2012, pursuant to AIDAR 722.170, the FAIR Project obtained the Mission Director waiver to allow project to pay Third Country Nationals (TCNs) in excess of the USAID/Ukraine Local Employee Compensation Plan (LECP) and in U.S. Dollars. New Justice received confirmation from USAID that due to a policy memo that was issued in frames of FAIR Project, we do not need to seek a waiver for TCNs, as this memo overrides our contract.

The Program obtained the Ukraine visa and obtained the temporary residence permit in Ukraine for COP Mr. Vaughn according to requirements of Ukrainian legislation.

Cost Control. New Justice saves USG resources by attracting non-federal in-kind or cash contributions from local partners or other international donors, while organizing and conducting its activities, trainings, conferences, roundtables, and study visits. New Justice shares its resources with other USG-funded projects, other international donor organizations, as well as its counterparts.

In Year I, the program shared the LOE of consultants, trainers, and experts and contributed training materials and other resources to FAIR-supported events in cooperation with the EU, COE, Canadian Embassy, the OSCE, the European Union

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 31

Advisory Mission for Civilian Security Sector Reform Ukraine (EUAM Ukraine), the International Renaissance Foundation, the American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative (ABA ROLI), U.S. Department of Justice Regional Legal Advisor (RLA), the Commercial Law Center (CLC), the USAID RADA Project, the USAID-PC Local Capacity Development Program (LCDP), the USAID Decentralization Offering Better Results and Efficiency Project (DOBRE) Project, and the Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union. The project always strives to get the lowest rates and conducts market research related to the procurement of goods and services. New Justice’s Home Office (HO) and Field Office (FO) monitor the program budget on a monthly basis, in order to ensure effective cost management.

VAT. In this reporting period, New Justice submitted eleven informational reports to the Shevchenkivska Tax Inspection in Kyiv City reflection all VAT-exempted procurements done from November 2016 to September 2017. New Justice enters into efficient negotiations with new vendors and subcontractors on VAT exemption, and encourages them to sign special provisions in contracts to follow the VAT exemption procedure in order to be in line with USAID requirements and to save program funds.

Finance, Accounting, Administration. Pursuant to Section F.3 of the Task Order, New Justice submitted the Accruals and Estimated Expenditure Rates (former known as burn rates) in a timely manner according to the donor’s requirements. New Justice procures all commodities and services and disseminate the grant programs in the most efficient manner possible in compliance with applicable Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), USAID Acquisition Regulation (AIDAR), Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), and relevant ADS polices to the greatest degree possible. As such, New Justice selects vendors and issues orders on a competitive basis to the maximum practical extent.

Business Conduct. In this reporting period, New Justice staff successfully completed 2016 Chemonics' Standards of Business Conduct, 2017 Chemonics' Standards of Business Conduct trainings and completed Chemonics’ 3rd annual ethics and compliance program survey.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 32

ANNEX A. M&E PLAN ANNUAL PROGRAM YEAR ONE MONITORING AND EVALUATION DATA

New Justice will achieve 88 expected results (ERs), which will lead, in turn, to high-level changes in the justice system. These changes represent five program objectives and sixteen program sub-objectives (SOs). New Justice has 70 output and outcome indicators to measure program key results. This Annex contains three exhibits: I) New Justice Results Framework which represents linkages between Program ERs, SOs, Objectives and Goal II) FY2017 data for independence and accountability of the Ukrainian Judiciary based on European Network of Councils for Judiciary (ENCJ) basket indicators III) Program Year One Indicator Data Table which shows the annual FY2017 values for indicators versus annual targets with notes and explanations, as well as targets for next years

This Annex also contains the revised Reference Sheet for Program Goal Indicator Ratio of Ukrainian justice system compliance with the Venice Commission Rule of Law Checklist. The revisions made are: a) indicator definition changes the number of Venice Commission Rule of Law Check List benchmarks to be assessed by New Justice Stakeholder Advisory Group (SAG) from initial 74 to 55 because the precise expert review of Check List identified that this is the total number of benchmarks relevant to judiciary; b) indicator definition also sets transferring 5-point evaluation scale 1,2,3,4,5 to ratio scale 0,0.25,0.5,0.75,1; c) unit of measure language changed from “score 0.20 (lowest) to 1.00 (highest)” to “ratio 0.00 (lowest) to 1.00 (highest).”

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 33

EXHIBIT 1. NEW JUSTICE RESULTS FRAMEWORK

USAID Program Brief Reducing Corruption in the USAID Democracy, Human Rights and Governance 2015 National Security Strategy Judiciary Strategy

USAID/Ukraine Country Development Cooperation USAID/Ukraine Anti-Corruption Goal: A More Stable, Democratic and Prosperous Ukraine Strategy Project

• Reinforcing vertical and horizontal Development Objective 1: More Participatory, Transparent and Accountable Government Processes accountability by building the capacity of key state institutions to fight corruption • Increasing citizens role in holding the government accountable to fight corruption Intermediate Result 1.1: Intermediate Result 1.2: Intermediate Result 1.3: • Improving the quality and transparency of key Improved legislative and policy environment Improved citizens oversight and The GOU (including the Judiciary) is public services in line with European Standards engagement in governance more accountable to its citizens and the • Strengthening the rule of law rule of law

Nove Pravosuddya Justice Sector Reform Goal: Independent, accountable, transparent and effective justice system that upholds the rule of law and is Program empowered to fight corruption

Objective 1: Judicial Independence and Self-Governance strengthened

Objective 2: Accountability and Transparency of the Judiciary to Citizens and the Rule of Law Increased

Objective 3: Administration of Justice Enhanced

Objective 4: Quality of Legal Education Strengthened

Objective 5: Access to Justice Expanded and Human Rights Protected

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 34

EXHIBIT 1. NEW JUSTICE RESULTS FRAMEWORK (CONTINUED)

Goal: Independent, accountable, transparent and effective justice system that upholds the Objectives 2, 3, 4, 5: rule of law and is empowered to fight corruption see next page

Objective 1: Judicial Independence and Self-Governance strengthened

Sub -Objective 1.1: Judicial Sub-Objective 1.2: Judicial Self-Governance Strengthened Sub-Objective 1.3: Judiciary exercises independence Sub-Objective 1.4: Improper independence established effectively and unlawful external influence through reformed Constitutional, on Judiciary reduced Statutory and Regulatory Expected Results 1.2 Expected Results 1.3 framework 1. Authorities of Judicial self-governance bodies (e.g., the High 1. The Judiciary exercises independence with regards to Expected Results 1.4

Council of Justice, among others) clearly defined and understood judges, personnel, budget authority, and other areas of 1. Judicial decisions are based by judicial leadership, judges and judicial personnel judicial competence solely on the facts and law,

Expected Results 1.1 and reversed only through the 2. The Judiciary exerts leadership in developing strategies, objectives, 2. The Judiciary effectively exercises competencies in 1. Constitutional safeguards for appellate process and initiatives to effectively promote and protect its independence, judicial testing, vetting, recruitment, performance judicial independence while ensuring accountability, integrity, transparency and high evaluation, transfer, promotion, discipline and lustration strengthened 2. Members of the Presidential ethical standards of judges using merit-based system Administration, Government

2. Participatory and inclusive and Parliament engage the 3. Representation and leadership of women judges in judicial 3. 90% of Judicial testing, vetting, recruitment, performance consultative processes for Judiciary in a constructive governance bodies and courts enhanced evaluation, transfer, promotion, discipline and lustration constitutional amendments, manner that respects judicial results published online legislation and other independence and refrains 4. Participation and inclusion of judges, judicial personnel, advocates normative acts related to from improperly or unlawfully and citizens in judicial governance strengthened 4. Implementation of ethics enforcement mechanisms interfering with the judicial independence strengthened established impartiality of judicial 5. Judicial performance standards for merit-based testing, vetting, decision-making and recruitment, performance evaluation, transfer, promotion, 5. Judges, judicial personnel and advocates change attitude professional conduct 3. The Judiciary positively discipline and lustration established towards reporting corruption, unethical or other illegal influences the parliament and conduct by their peers 3. Sufficient resources are executive in the development 6. Rules regarding corruption, judicial ethics and illegal conduct, as and allocation of legislation allocated to protect judges well as related disciplinary sanctions and enforcement procedures, 6. Reporting of corruption, unethical or illegal conduct by and judicial personnel from affecting the judiciary, strengthened judges, judicial personnel, advocates and citizens including the judicial budget threats such as harassment, increased assault, and other forms of 7. Reporting of corruption, unethical or illegal conduct simplified and 4. Legislation, regulations, and intimidation and violence made more accessible for judges, judicial personnel, advocates and 7. Protections for individuals who report corruption, operating procedures to citizens unethical or illegal conduct against judges, judicial implement constitutional 4. Judges are empowered to personnel and advocates applied report improper or illegal amendments related to 8. Protections increased for individuals who report corruption, judicial independence adopted interference in their judicial unethical or illegal conduct against judges, judicial personnel and 8. Number of disciplinary measures against judges, judicial decision making and conduct with public notice and advocates personnel and advocates for corruption, unethical or consultation illegal conduct increased

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 35

EXHIBIT 1. NEW JUSTICE RESULTS FRAMEWORK (CONTINUED)

Objective 1: Goal: Independent, accountable, transparent and effective justice system that Objectives 3, 4, 5: see next page see previous page upholds the rule of law and is empowered to fight corruption

Objective 2: Accountability and Transparency of the Judiciary to Citizens and the Rule of Law Increased

Sub-Objective 2.1: Transparency by Sub-Objective 2.2: Horizontal Accountability - Sub-Objective 2.3: Social Accountability - Judiciary Held Accountable the Judiciary Increased Checks and Balances on the Judiciary by other by Citizens, Civil Society and Independent Media Branches of Government strengthened Expected Results 2.1 Expected Results 2.3

Expected Results 2.2

1. Increased awareness among citizens of 1. Citizens and CSOs actively participate in and monitor judicial reform the right to and limitations of judicial 1. Lustration process concludes without violations of processes at the local and national levels

transparency in courtroom proceedings due process or human rights of lustrated judges

and judicial governance and judicial personnel 2. Court operations improved through direct citizen feedback (e.g., Citizen Report Cards)

2. Increased public access to courtroom 2. Judiciary coordinates with the National Agency for

and judicial governance proceedings in- the Prevention of Corruption to develop and 3. Formal linkages between civil society and judicial, governmental and person, on-line, via TV/radio, or implement corruption-prevention measures within parliamentary institutions established (through, e.g., Memoranda of through archived recordings and the Judiciary Understanding or Joint Strategies and Action Plans) records 4. Citizen awareness of judicial reform and corruption increased 3. Judiciary facilitates National Anti-Corruption 3. Increased outreach by the Judiciary to Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and Prosecutor

the public and press General’s Office investigations into alleged 5. Citizen reports to anti-corruption organizations and agencies increased

corruption or other illicit conduct by judges or

4. 90% completion of financial and asset judicial personnel 6. Judicial-reform oriented CSOs organizational capacity score increased declarations by judges and judicial 7. Professional Associations and Bar Associations increase capacity for self- personnel, with 90% of judicial financial 4. Judiciary coordinates with parliamentary oversight and asset declarations published online committees, with due respect for judicial regulation and professional standards independence and freedom from interference 8. Quality and volume of investigative journalism and other media reporting 5. on corruption, judicial misconduct, judicial reforms, high-profile court cases, and other rule of law issues increased

9. Media and CSOs analyze and publicize financial and asset declarations compared to actual lifestyle

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 36

EXHIBIT 1. NEW JUSTICE RESULTS FRAMEWORK (CONTINUED)

Objective 1, 2: Goal: Independent, accountable, transparent and effective justice system that Objectives 4, 5: see previous page upholds the rule of law and is empowered to fight corruption see next page

Objective 3: Administration of Justice Enhanced

Sub-Objective 3.1: Judicial Sub-Objective 3.2: Professional Sub-Objective 3.3: Mediation and Sub-Objective 3.4: System of

Administration Institutions, Policies, and Competencies and Expertise of Judges Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Enforcement of Judgments

Procedures Strengthened and Judicial Personnel Improved Strengthened Improved

Expected Results 3.1 Expected Results 3.2 Expected Results 3.3 Expected Results 3.4

1. Judicial administration bodies function in 1. National School of Judges methodologies, 1. Comprehensive analyses of current 1. Normative framework for more coherent and coordinated fashion core curriculum, and trainers context, barriers and opportunities for enforcement of judgments strengthened and meet international developing mediation and other ADR revised 2. Strategies, policies, and procedures for standards processes in Ukraine completed managing court operations, and 2. Rules and procedures for providing quality services to the public 2. Judges and judicial assistants trained in 2. Normative (legislative, regulatory) licensing, oversight, and implemented core substantive and procedural law, framework for mediation and other ADR assignment of private judicial ethics, leadership, and processes strengthened consistent with enforcement agents adopted 3. Courts equipped with and use IT and e- management international best practices justice systems to improve efficiency of 3. Association of Enforcement workflow, case management and 3. Judicial personnel demonstrate 3. Professional association for mediators Agents established and cadre of accessibility to services competencies in key areas of management and other ADR practitioners private enforcement agents and operational support strengthened trained and certified 4. Courts hear and conclude cases in a timely manner and without undue delays 4. Attitude of judges and judicial personnel 4. Professional knowledge, expertise, and 4. Enforcement agents equipped of themselves and their peers is positive integrity of mediators enhanced with the necessary systems, 5. Judicial budgeting, financial management, (e.g., selfimage as honest, professional, tools, and sufficient budgetary internal controls and external auditing performing a public service, not-corrupt) 5. Mediation and other ADR processes support to manage case load improved and compliant with national integrated into the legal culture and court and adequately care for assets laws and international best practice 5. By the end of the Program, the NSJ is able processes under their supervision to provide high-quality, modern, 6. Judicial procurement systems more professional development services to 6. Use of mediation and other ADR 5. Judgments are enforced in a transparent and compliant with national judges and judicial personnel with limited processes in civil and commercial cases timely and effective manner laws and international best practices donor support increased

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 37

EXHIBIT 1. NEW JUSTICE RESULTS FRAMEWORK (CONTINUED)

Objective 1, 2, 3: Independent, accountable, transpa rent and effective justice system that Objectives 5: Goal: see previous page upholds the rule of law and is empowered to fight corruption see next page

Objective 4: Quality of Legal Education Strengthened

Sub-Objective 4.1: National Strategy and Standards Sub-Objective 4.2: Quality Assurance Sub-Objective 4.3: Practice Oriented and Skills Based for Legal Education and Accreditation Adopted Frameworks for Law Schools Developed Instruction, Curriculum, and Activities Integrated

Expected Results 4.1 Expected Results 4.2 Expected Results 4.3

1. National education strategy and standards for legal 1. Policies and procedures for comprehensive 1. Modern instructional methods adopted and implemented to education and accreditation adopted by Ministry of quality assurance frameworks based on ensure effective practice oriented, skills based learning and Education, with input from Ministry of Justice and key international standards and comparative best formally adopted into school curriculum stakeholders including representatives of civil society practices adopted by leading law schools 2. Institutional curriculum effectively prepares law student for 2. Law school administrators, faculty leadership, and 2. Law school administrators, faculty career in the Judiciary and other legal professions instructors aware of and understand national strategy and leadership, instructors, and student standards for legal education and accreditation government representatives trained on 3. Law school legal clinics (including specialized clinics) nature, scope, and operation of quality developed and integrated into formal curriculum 3. Law schools revise policies, procedures, and legal assurance framework education practices in compliance with national standards 4. Judicial clerkship program created in coordination with for legal education and accreditation 3. Quality Assurance Units in leading law judicial self-governance bodies and courts schools established and functioning 4. A minimal standard and gold standard accreditation is 5. Independent, external examinations for law school adopted to increase competition among the law schools admissions and graduation implemented

6. Memorandum of Understanding concluded with key legal education partners to sustain USAID investments after the end of the Program

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 38

EXHIBIT 1. NEW JUSTICE RESULTS FRAMEWORK (CONTINUED)

Objective 1, 2, 3, 4: Goal: Independent, accountable, transparent and effective justice system that see previous page upholds the rule of law and is empowered to fight corruption

Objective 5: Access to Justice Expanded and Human Rights Protected

Sub-Objective 5.2: Justice Accessible to Citizens, including the Most Sub-Objective 5.1: Justice Accessible to Citizens, including the Most Vulnerable Vulnerable

Expected Results 5.1 Expected Results 5.2

1. Physical, geographic. cultural, financial, informational, legal and procedural barriers to 1. Awareness of human rights and humanitarian law, how to exercise those rights, the courts removed or lowered for all citizens, including vulnerable groups and the role of the courts in protecting human rights increased among judges, judicial personnel and advocates 2. Citizens access to court information increased 2. Increased number of human rights and humanitarian law cases resolved 3. E-justice systems accessible to citizens to ease case filing, tracking, document submission; payment and other court procedures and transactions 3. Referral networks among judges, judicial personnel, advocates, social workers, health workers, police, and community leaders strengthened 4. Citizens access to court-annexed mediation/ADR processes developed under 3.3 increased 4. Human rights coalitions monitor and successfully advocate the GOU, Judiciary, and Legal Aid Centers for increased protection of human rights by the courts 5. Awareness of the rights of Persons with Disabilities, SGBV survivors, IDPs, veterans and other vulnerable groups is increased among judges, judicial personnel and advocates 5. Judiciary coordinates regularly with the Human Rights Ombudsman and other key human rights institutions to improve the protection of human rights and 6. SGBV survivors, children and other vulnerable victims or witnesses afforded greater humanitarian law through the courts protections

7. Citizens, including vulnerable groups, actively participate in access to justice reforms

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 39

EXHIBIT II. FY2017 DATA FOR JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN UKRAINE ACCORDING TO THE EUROPEAN NETWORK OF COUNCILS FOR JUDICIARY (ENCJ) INDICATORS

10 10 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 1 1

0

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 40

EXHIBIT III. NEW JUSTICE FY2017 INDICATOR DATA TABLE Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Program Independent, accountable, transparent and effective justice system that upholds the rule of law and is empowered to fight Goal corruption New Justice SAG conducted assessment of Ukrainian judiciary compliance with 55 benchmarks of VC Check-List in Oct Ratio of Ukrainian 17. The ratio 0.54 is 54% compliance justice system with the benchmarks. The ratio for individual benchmarks varies from Indicator 1 compliance with the Outcome Oct-17 0.54 N/A 0.54 0.60 0.70 0.8 minimum 0.16 for enforcement of Venice Commission judgement to 0.84 for Constitutional Rule of Law Checklist guarantees of judicial independence. The ratio for perception of judiciary by public as capable to fight corruption is 0.25. Objective 1 Judicial Independence and Self-Governance strengthened S-O 1.1 Judicial independence established through reformed Constitutional, Statutory and Regulatory framework Constitutional safeguards for judicial independence strengthened in key areas, (including appointment, promotion, transfer, and discipline of ER 1.1.1 judges), comply with international and European standards of judicial independence, and reflect citizen input Indexed score for Current data represents July 2017 European Network survey of HCJ members. Score 5.8 out of Councils for of possible 10 means yellow (neutral) Judiciary (ENCJ) conditions for judicial independence in Indicator 2 Outcome Apr-17 5.8 6 5.8 6 6.51 8 Ukraine. This is an integral score that basket of indicators combines indicators for legal base of for objective and judicial independence, organizational subjective judicial autonomy, funding, human resource independence. decisions, public trust etc.

1 SAG will set 2018 and further targets for ENCJ indicators for judicial independence and accountability in Ukraine on its third meeting in March 2017

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 41

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Inclusive consultative processes for developing and implementing constitutional amendments, legislation, and other normative acts related to ER 1.1.2 judicial independence established Number of judicial personnel, GOU, and civil society representatives involved in public 2017 data includes regional discussions discussions on the on anti-corruption court in Kyiv, Odesa Indicator 3 Output Sep-16 0 200 220 200 N/A 400 and Kharkiv, and conference on judicial implementation of self-governance. Data disaggregation: constitutional and 124 (56%) men, 96 (44%) women. legislative amendments regarding justice sector reform The Judiciary positively influences the parliament and executive branch in the development and allocation of legislation affecting the judiciary, ER 1.1.3 including the judicial budget Legislation, regulations, and operating procedures to implement constitutional amendments related to judicial independence adopted with public ER 1.1.4 notice and consultation

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 42

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017

FY2017 counts the following: 1) Law on High Council of Justice; 2)Rules of Procedure for the Congress of Judges of Ukraine; 3) Regulation on the Council of Judges of Ukraine; 4) Regulation on the Number of laws, Competition to Occupy the Vacant regulations and Position of a Judge; 5) Procedure and procedures Methodology of Qualification Exam; 6) Indicator 4 Output Sep-16 21 6 8 6 5 19 enhancing judicial Regulation on Conducting the Exam and independence the Methodology of Determining its adopted Results in the Qualification Evaluation Procedure; 7) Regulation on the HCJ Commission; 8) Rules of Procedure for Mandatory External Independent Standardized Entrance Exam for Master in Law. S-O 1.2 Judicial Self-Governance Strengthened

Indexed Score of FY2017 data represents July 2017 survey ENCJ indicator on of HCJ members. Score 6.4 out of Indicator 5 Organizational Outcome Apr-17 7.7 7 6.4 7 7.5 8 possible 10 means green (positive) Autonomy of the conditions of organizational autonomy of Judiciary judiciary in Ukraine. Authorities of Judicial self-governance bodies (e.g., the High Council of Justice, among others) clearly defined and understood by judicial ER 1.2.1 leadership, judges, and judicial personnel Percent of judges and FY2017 is a data and refers to July 2017 judicial personnel national survey of judges. 38% of respondents agreed that High Council of Indicator 6 who consider judicial Outcome Jul-17 38% N/A 38% 45% TBD TBD Justice has appropriate mechanisms and self-governance in procedures to effectively defend judicial Ukraine effective independence. The Judiciary exerts leadership in developing strategies, objectives, and initiatives to effectively promote and protect its independence, while ER 1.2.2 ensuring accountability, integrity, transparency and high ethical standards

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 43

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017

Indexed Score of FY2017 data represents July 2017 survey Indicator 5 ENCJ indicator on of HCJ members. Score 6.4 out of measures this Organizational Outcome Apr-17 7.7 7 6.4 7 7.5 8 possible 10 means green (positive) ER Autonomy of the conditions of organizational autonomy of Judiciary judiciary in Ukraine. ER 1.2.3 Representation and leadership of women judges in judicial governance bodies and courts enhanced Percent of female chief judges in courts and female Baseline assessment delay. Expected to Indicator 7 Outcome Mar-17 TBD 30% N/A 30% 30% 30% chairpersons in complete in the FY2018. judicial governance bodies ER 1.2.4 Participation and inclusion of judges, judicial personnel, advocates, and citizens in judicial governance strengthened

Indicator 5 Indexed Score of FY2017 data represents July 2017 survey mentioned ENCJ indicator on of HCJ members. Score 6.4 out of above Organizational Outcome Apr-17 7.7 7 6.4 7 7.5 8 possible 10 means green (positive) measures this Autonomy of the conditions of organizational autonomy of ER Judiciary judiciary in Ukraine. Judicial performance standards for merit-based testing, vetting, recruitment, performance evaluation, transfer, promotion, discipline, and ER 1.2.5 lustration established Number of judicial performance No changes since baseline. HQC Indicator 8 Output Sep-16 10 30 10 30 TBD 30 operates with 10 judicial performance indicators adopted indicators adopted in 2015. and implemented ER 1.2.6 Rules regarding corruption, judicial ethics and illegal conduct, as well as related disciplinary sanctions and enforcement procedures, strengthened ER 1.2.7 Reporting of corruption, unethical or illegal conduct simplified and made more accessible for judges, judicial personnel, advocates, and citizens ER 1.2.8 Protections increased for individuals who report corruption, unethical or illegal conduct against judges, judicial personnel and advocates

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 44

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Number of newly developed or No changes in FY2017. improved tools for New Justice continues to work with reporting corruption, international and Ukrainian short-term experts to develop recommendations to Indicator 9 unethical or illegal Output Sep-16 0 3 0 3 4 7 the GOU regarding the effective conducts such as mechanisms for incentives and standardized forms, protection for individuals who report web-based petitions, corruption. hotlines etc S-O 1.3 Judiciary exercises independence effectively Current data represents July 2017 survey of HCJ members combined with Indexed score for recent data of the national survey of European Network judges. of Councils for Score 3.6 means out of possible 10 Indicator 10 Judiciary (ENCJ) Outcome Apr-17 4.6 4 3.6 5 6 7 means orange (negative) rate of indicators for subjective judicial independence. This subjective judicial indicator assesses public trust in the independence judiciary and perception of judicial independence by public in general and by court users. ER 1.3.1 The Judiciary exercises independence with regards to judges, personnel, budget authority, and other areas of judicial competence

Index score for ENCJ Current data represents July 2017 survey of HCJ members. Indicator 11 indicator for funding Outcome Apr-17 4.3 5 4.3 5 6 7 Score 3.9 means orange (negative) rate of the Judiciary for funding of the judiciary in Ukraine. The Judiciary effectively exercises competencies in judicial testing, vetting, recruitment, performance evaluation, transfer, promotion, discipline ER 1.3.2 and lustration of judges using merit-based system ER 1.3.3 90% of Judicial testing, vetting, recruitment, performance evaluation, transfer, promotion, discipline and lustration results published online

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 45

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017

FY2017 quarter data is the following: HCJ made 112 decisions including Percent of HCJ and related to judicial discipline, suspending HQC decisions judges from rendering justice and judicial Indicator 12 Output Sep-16 62% 80% 86% 90% 90% 100% selection, 109 are posted on HCJ published on their website. HQC made 15 selection and websites discipline decisions, failed to post them on HQC website.

ER 1.3.4 Implementation of ethics enforcement mechanisms strengthened ER 1.3.5 Judges, judicial personnel, and advocates change attitudes towards reporting corruption, unethical or other illegal conduct by their peers Annual 2017 data is a baseline and it Percent of judges, refers to July 2017 national survey of judicial personnel and judges and legal professionals working in advocates who courts but who are not judicial acknowledge their employees (advocates, prosecutors and Indicator 13 responsibility for Outcome July-17 45% N/A 31% 40% 50% TBD others). 31% of respondents reporting corruption, acknowledge that they will report unethical or illegal corruption or illegal conduct of their conduct by their peers. For judges, however, the peers percentage is much lower - 27%, for advocates and prosecutors it’s 36%. ER 1.3.6 Reporting of corruption, unethical or illegal conduct by judges, judicial personnel, advocates and citizens increased ER 1.3.7 Protections for individuals who report corruption, unethical or illegal conduct against judges, judicial personnel and advocates applied Percent of survey respondents who report known or Annual FY2017 Data is a baseline and it Indicator 14 personally Context Sep-17 25.3% N/A 25.3% TBD TBD TBD refers to August-September 2017 experienced cases of national public survey. corruption, unethical, or illegal conduct

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 46

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017

ER 1.3.8 Number of disciplinary measures against judges, judicial personnel and advocates for corruption, unethical or illegal conduct increased Number of discipline sanctions Indicator 15 Outcome Sep-16 4 5 4 6 7 7 No changes since baseline. implemented by judiciary and bar SO 1.4 Improper and unlawful external influence on Judiciary reduced

Indexed score for Current data represents April 2017 procedures in case of survey of SAG members. threat to Score 4.4 means orange (negative) status Indicator 16 Outcome Apr-17 4.4 5 4.4 5 5.5 7 independence. Part of of procedures in case of threat to ENCJ basket for judicial independence, e.g. procedures judicial independence are poor and poorly implemented. ER 1.4.1 Judicial decisions are based solely on the facts and law, and reversed only through the appellate process Score for quality of judgment in Annual 2017 data refers to EBA 2016 Indicator 17 European Business Context Mar-16 2.81 N/A 2.92 N/A N/A N/A Court Index Report published in Feb Association Court 2017. Index Members of the Presidential Administration, Government and Parliament engage the Judiciary in a constructive manner that respects judicial ER 1.4.2 independence and refrains from improperly or unlawfully interfering with the impartiality of judicial decision-making and professional conduct Sufficient resources are allocated to protect judges and judicial personnel from threats such as harassment, assault, and other forms of ER 1.4.3 intimidation and violence

Indexed score for Current data represents April 2017 procedures in case of Indicator 16 survey of SAG members. threat to Score 4.4 means orange (negative) status measures Outcome Apr-17 4.4 5 4.4 5 5.5 7 independence. Part of of procedures in case of threat to these ERs ENCJ basket for judicial independence, e.g. procedures judicial independence are poor and poorly implemented.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 47

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017

ER 1.4.4 Judges are empowered to report improper or illegal interference in their judicial decision making and conduct Annual 2017 data refers to July 2017 Percent of judges national survey of Judges. According to survey respondents this survey 291 respondent out of 725 who acknowledge experienced improper or illegal their readiness to interference in their judicial decision Indicator 18 Outcome Jul-17 13.06% N/A 13.06% TBD TBD TBD report improper or making, but only 38 of them (13.06%) illegal interference in reported these cases to judicial their judicial decision authorities (HCJ, COJ, Court making Presidents) or law enforcement agencies. Objective 2 Accountability and Transparency of the Judiciary to Citizens and the Rule of Law Increased 2017 data refers to survey of HCJ members resulted in the following data for judicial accountability in Ukraine: allocation of cases – 7.3, Index score ENCJ complaint procedures – 5.7, periodic indicators for reporting – 5.2, relations with press – Indicator 19 Outcome Apr-17 6.8 7 6.03 7 7.5 8 accountability of the 7.7, external audit – 2.9, code of Ethics – judiciary and judges 9.8, withdrawal and recusal – 7.5, admissibility of accessory functions – 6.2, understandability of proceedings – 1.8 Overall rating for accountability is green (positive). S-O 2.1 Transparency by the Judiciary Increased

Percent of Ukrainian In 2017 none of Ukrainian courts or courts and judicial judicial institutions published annual Indicator 20 institutions that Output Feb-17 0% N/A 0% TBD TBD TBD report on their activity. SJA prepared its develop and publish annual report for the Congress of Judges annual reports. but never published it on-line. ER 2.1.1 Increased awareness among citizens of the right to and limitations of judicial transparency in courtroom proceedings and judicial governance

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 48

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Increased public access to courtroom and judicial governance proceedings in-person, on-line, via TV/radio, or through archived recordings and ER 2.1.2 records Percent of citizens reporting that Annual 2017 data is a baseline and it Indicator 21 Context Sep-17 TBD 13.4% 13.4% 15% 20% N/A refers to August-September national judiciary is open and public survey. transparent ER 2.1.3 Increased outreach by the Judiciary to the public and press

Number of COJ, SJA, HCJ, HQC, NSJ developed communication new communication strategy on strategies promoting awareness of judiciary among Indicator 22 Output Sep-16 24 30 25 40 40 50 implemented by school and high school students. This is courts and judicial the only one new figure in 2017 in institutions addition to baseline data. 90% completion of financial and asset declarations by judges and judicial personnel, with 90% of judicial financial and asset declarations published ER 2.1.4 online Percent of financial and assets declarations by Baseline assessment delay due to low judges and judicial efficiency of GOU institutions, Indicator 23 Outcome Mar-182 TBD N/A N/A TBD TBD TBD personnel posted in particularly, NAPC and SJA in providing Unified Registry of credible information. Public Officials Declarations S-O 2.2 Horizontal Accountability -Checks and Balances on the Judiciary by other Branches of Government strengthened ER 2.2.1 Lustration process concludes without violations of due process or human rights of lustrated judges and judicial personnel

2 Baseline date changed due to low capacity of GOU institutions to provide reliable information and insure data availability on GOU resources.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 49

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017

Disaggregation: 43 men, 49 women; 82 Number of are judicial personnel and 10 are government officials executive branch personnel. Topics Indicator 24 receiving USG- Output Sep-16 0 300 92 200 300 500 include: anti-corruption education for supported anti- law students curricula development, corruption training study-tour on anti—corruption court, judicial discipline. ER 2.2.2 Judiciary coordinates with the NAPC to develop and implement corruption-prevention measures within the Judiciary Judiciary facilitates NABU and Prosecutor General’s Office investigations into alleged corruption or other illicit conduct by judges or judicial ER 2.2.3 personnel Number of stakeholder meetings to improve cooperation in Activity delay. Stakeholder meetings Indicator 25 Output Sep-16 0 1 0 4 6 11 corruption postponed till FY2018. investigations involving judiciary and executive branch ER 2.2.4 Judiciary coordinates with parliamentary oversight committees, with due respect for judicial independence and freedom from interference Number of meetings between judicial representatives and parliament Indicator 26 representatives to Output Sep-16 0 1 0 4 6 11 Activity delay. Coordination meetings facilitate judicial postponed till FY2018. independence and freedom from interference S-O 2.3 Social Accountability - Judiciary Held Accountable by Citizens, Civil Society and Independent Media

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 50

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Percent of Ukrainian courts that Activity delay due to new court mapping Indicator 27 Output Sep-16 42% 55% N/A 55% 65% 75% (SJA). User satisfaction surveys in courts implement user postponed till FY2018. satisfaction surveys Percent of partner CSOs performance Activity delay due to new court mapping improvement (SJA). Analysis of user satisfaction Indicator 28 Outcome Sep-16 57% 60% N/A 60% 65% 75% recommendations surveys impact in courts postponed till implemented by FY2018. courts ER 2.3.1 Citizens and CSOs actively participate in and monitor judicial reform processes at the local and national levels

Number of citizens Activity delay due to new court mapping providing inputs in (SJA). User satisfaction surveys in courts judicial reform postponed till FY2018. The FY2017 data Indicator 29 implementation and Output Sep-16 21,151 10,500 7,180 10,500 10,500 50,000 refers to implementation of CRC monitoring and court monitoring in 106 courts and NGO performance Coalition monitoring of court premises evaluation and services accessibility for PWDs. ER 2.3.2 Court operations improved through direct citizen feedback (e.g., CRCs)

CRC integral score Activity delay due to new court mapping Indicator 30 for participating Outcome Sep-16 0.84 0.8 N/A 0.82 0.85 0.85 (SJA). User satisfaction surveys in courts courts postponed till FY2018. Formal linkages between civil society and judicial, governmental and parliamentary institutions established (through, e.g., MOUS or joint ER 2.3.3 strategies and action plans)

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 51

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017

2017 data refers to formalized linkages of New Justice CSO partners with Number of GOU. These linkages are: formalized linkages • Legal Development Network - between civil society 11 MoUs with local authorities and judicial, • Ukrainian National Mediators governmental and Association - 2 MoUs with Indicator 31 Output Sep-16 0 2 16 15 20 50 parliamentary local authorities institutions • Ukrainian Helsinki Union of established, Human Rights -one MoU with documented and GOU and one MoU with local implemented authorities • Human Rights Vector – one MoU with COJ ER 2.3.4 Citizen awareness of judicial reform and corruption increased Percent of survey 2017 data is based on the national public respondents who survey results conducted in August- indicate that are fully September 2017. Only 1% of Indicator 32 Context Sep-16 7% 12% 9% 15% 18% 21% respondents acknowledged their full aware and mostly awareness about the judicial reform and aware about the 8% indicated that they are mostly aware judicial reform about the subject. ER 2.3.5 Citizen reports to anti-corruption organizations and agencies increased 2017 data is based on the national public Percent of survey survey results conducted in August- respondents who September 2017. 55% of respondents indicate their disagreed with the statement “Bribery Indicator 33 Context Sep-16 50% 55% 55% 65% 70% 70% extremely negative and other similar manifestations of attitude towards corruption are acceptable to me in case corruption if they help resolve the issues in my favor and in a more rapid way” ER 2.3.6 Judicial-reform oriented CSOs organizational capacity score increased

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 52

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017

2017 data is a revised baseline and it counts the result of organizational USAID CSO 3.5 4.0 3.5 capacity expert assessment for fourteen Sustainability Index 5.12 5.12 4.0 (max (max (max current partner CSO. Integral score Indicator 34 for project partner Outcome Sep-17 (max 1, (max 1, (max 1, counts CSO organizational capacity 1, min 1, min 1, min judicial reform min 7) min 7) min 7) (mission, strategic planning, 7) 7) 7) oriented CSO management, governance and human resource), financial viability, public image, advocacy and service provision. ER 2.3.7 Professional associations and Bar associations increase capacity for self-regulation and professional standards among members USAID CSO Baseline data collection postponed till Indicator 35 Sustainability Index Outcome Mar-17 TBD N/A N/A TBD TBD TBD 2018. for Bar Associations Quality and volume of investigative journalism and other media reporting on corruption, judicial misconduct, judicial reforms, high-profile court ER 2.3.8 cases, and other rule of law issues increased Percent of journalists trained by Nove Pravosuddya who apply new knowledge and skills in their professional activities No programmatic activities related to Indicator 36 reporting on Output Sep-16 0 20% N/A 25% 25% 30% this indicator took place during this corruption, judicial reporting period. misconduct, judicial reforms, high-profile court cases, and other rule of law issues Quality and volume of investigative journalism and other media reporting on corruption, judicial misconduct, judicial reforms, high-profile court ER 2.3.9 cases, and other rule of law issues increased

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 53

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Number of CSOs analyzing financial This quarter and 2017 annual data Indicator 37 Output Sep-16 1 3 1 3 3 3 counts the New Justice CSO partner assets declarations by Civic Lustration Committee. judges and court staff Objective 3 Administration of Justice Enhanced Ratio of Ukrainian justice system New Justice completed the preparation compliance with the of Ukrainian version of CEPEJ Check Commission for Mar- List, however Ukrainian counterparts – Indicator 38 Efficiency of Justice Outcome TBD N/A N/A TBD TBD TBD SJA and COJ has not yet provided New 183 (CEPEJ) Check-list Justice Program with filled in check lists. for Promoting the Baseline assessment postponed till Quality of Justice and March 2018. the Courts 2017 actual performance is significantly Number of USG- below target because New Justice had assisted courts with to postpone most of its activity related Indicator 39 improved case Output Sep-16 383 150 81 150 150 500 to improving case management in courts management systems due to introduction procedural changes (FAF DR.1.5-1) in all four jurisdictions which also has significant mean for case management. S-O 3.1 Judicial Administration Institutions, Policies, and Procedures Strengthened ER 3.1.1 Judicial administration bodies function in more coherent and coordinated fashion ER 3.1.2 Strategies, policies, and procedures for managing court operations, and providing quality services to the public implemented

3 Baseline data collection postponed till March 2018

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 54

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 International Framework for Judicial Support Excellence (IFJSE) March- Activity delay. Baseline data collection Indicator 40 Outcome TBD N/A N/A TBD TBD TBD score for justice 18 scheduled for Q2 of FY2018 sector supporting institutions (MOJ, HQC, HCJ etc.) ER 3.1.3 Courts equipped with and use IT and e-justice systems to improve efficiency of workflow, case management and accessibility to services This year data counts seven courts piloting e-justice software. The number includes the following New Justice’ Number of courts partner courts: Indicator 41 implementing e- Output Sep-16 3 5 7 6 TBD TBD Odessa Oblast Court of Appeals, justice systems Kyivskyi District Court of Odessa Oblast, Ovidiopolskyi Raion Court of the City of Odessa, Vinnytsia Administrative Court of Appeals. ER 3.1.4 Courts hear and conclude cases in a timely manner and without undue delays 2017 data refers for SJA judicial statistics Clearance rate of for the period from January to June of Ukrainian courts (key the calendar year 2017. Clearance rate Indicator 42 CEPEJ indicator for Context Mar-16 99% N/A 88.5% 90% 95% 99% constantly decreasing comparing to the the efficiency of last year because many judges resigned justice) or not eligible to render justice.

Judicial budgeting, financial management, internal controls and external auditing improved and compliant with national laws and international best ER 3.1.5 practice ER 3.1.6 Judicial procurement systems more transparent and compliant with national laws and international best practices

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 55

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Efficiency use of resources in Ukrainian courts 2017 data refers for SJA judicial statistics Indicator 43 calculated by CEPEJ- Context Mar-16 80% N/A 91% N/A N/A N/A for the period from January to June of recommended the calendar year 2017. method of simple linear regression S-O 3.2 Professional Competencies and Expertise of Judges and Judicial Personnel Improved ER 3.2.1 NSJ methodologies, core curriculum, and trainers strengthened and meet international standards ER 3.2.2 Judges and judicial assistants trained in core substantive and procedural law, judicial ethics, leadership, and management 2017 data refers to training on criminal proceedings against minors, interviewing Number of judicial 522 skills when conducting judicial selection, personnel trained (64% anti-corruption education for law students, opinion writing, disciplinary Indicator 44 with USG assistance Output Sep-16 5,067 500 women, 600 6.500 liability for judges etc. Number of (FAF Standard 36% trained men is 186, number of trained DR.1.3-1). men) women is 336. Other desegregations: judges – 101, court staff and other judicial personnel – 421. ER 3.2.3 Judicial personnel demonstrate competencies in key areas of management and operational support Number of court Indicator 45 administrators Output Sep-16 120 N/A N/A TBD TDB TBD Activity postponed. certified Attitude of judges and judicial personnel of themselves and their peers is positive (e.g., self-image as honest, professional, performing a public ER 3.2.4 service, not-corrupt)

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 56

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Percent of judges and judicial personnel annual survey 2017 data refers to July 2017 national respondents who survey of judges. 94,4% of respondents Indicator 46 Outcome Sep-16 89% 90% 94.4% 91% 91% 95% agreed that judges in their courts are admit their positive highly professional, independent and attitude to impartial. themselves and their peers By the end of the Program, the NSJ is able to provide high-quality, modern, professional development services to judges and judicial personnel ER 3.2.5 with limited donor support Annual 2017 data refers: 1. judicial ethics online course Number of training 2. judicial ethics in-class course curricula 3. court administration online implemented by NSJ course Indicator 47 without donor Output Sep-16 5 6 7 7 8 10 4. communication online course support (or very 5. communication in-class course limited donor 6. court staff communication support) with PWD 7. protection of environmental rights protection. S-O 3.3 Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Strengthened Number of organizations Indicator 48 providing ADR Outcome Sep-16 7 7 7 10 10 20 No changes since baseline services supported by Program Comprehensive analyses of current context, barriers and opportunities for developing mediation and other ADR processes in Ukraine ER 3.3.1 completed ER 3.3.2 Normative (legislative, regulatory) framework for mediation and other ADR processes strengthened consistent with international best practices.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 57

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Number of laws, regulations and procedures for ADR No changes in 2017. Draft Law on Indicator 49 Output Sep-16 0 2 0 2 3 5 Mediation passed first reading in the processes developed Parliament. and improved with project support ER 3.3.3 Professional association for mediators and other ADR practitioners strengthened. ER 3.3.4 Professional knowledge, expertise, and integrity of mediators enhanced ER 3.3.5 Mediation and other ADR processes integrated into the legal culture and court processes. ER 3.3.6 Use of mediation and other ADR processes in civil and commercial cases increased. 2017 data is the result of organizational capacity expert assessment of the Ukrainian National Association of Mediators. The score is based on USAID Organizational CSO Sustainability Index where capacity score for maximum is 1 and minimum is 7 association of (reversed scale) and integrates mission, Indicator 50 Outcome Sep-17 5.8 N/A 5.8 5 4.5 4 mediators using the strategic planning, management, CSO Sustainability governance and human resource. Index According to this assessment the organizational capacity score for association of mediators is very low, e.g. significantly below average Ukrainian CSO. S-O 3.4 System of Enforcement of Judgments Improved ER 3.4.1 Normative framework for enforcement of judgments revised ER 3.4.2 Rules and procedures for licensing, oversight, and assignment of private enforcement agents adopted

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 58

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Number of project supported newly adopted and New Justice contributed to the Working improved laws, Group to provide advisory support and Indicator 51 Output Sep-16 0 2 0 2 TBD TBD regulations and expertise in launching private procedures for enforcement agents’ profession. enforcement of judgments ER 3.4.3 Association of Enforcement Agents established and cadre of private enforcement agents trained and certified Number of private enforcement agents In 2017 New Justice supported MOJ in Indicator 52 Output Sep-16 0 TBD 94 TBD TBD TBD training and certifying first-ever in trained and certified Ukraine private enforcement agents. with USAID support Enforcement agents equipped with the necessary systems, tools, and sufficient budgetary support to manage case load and adequately care for ER 3.4.4 assets under their supervision

ER 3.4.5 Judgments are enforced in a timely and effective manner Percent of judgments enforced within Baseline data collection postponed. Indicator 53 Context Jul-17 TBD N/A N/A TBD TBD TBD GOU partners are not capable to timeframe stipulated provide reliable data. by law Objective 4 Quality of Legal Education Strengthened

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 59

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017

In 2017 New Justice supported: 1. Donetsk National University Law School 2. Karazin Law School Number of host 3. Kyiv-Mohyla Law School country tertiary 4. Odesa Law Academy education institutions 5. Kyiv Taras Shevchenko University Law School Indicator 54 receiving capacity Output Sep-16 10 12 9 14 15 20 6. Uzhorod National University development support Law School with USG assistance 7. Yuri Fedkovych Univercity (FAF ES.2-1) Law School 8. Zaporizhia National University Law 9. Lviv Catholic University Law School S-O 4.1 National Strategy and Standards for Legal Education and Accreditation Adopted National education strategy and standards for legal education and accreditation adopted by Ministry of Education, with input the MOJ and key ER 4.1.1 stakeholders including representatives of civil society 2017 data counts 1. Methodology for Independent, Number of policies External, On-Site Assessment and/or procedures of Legal Education Quality developed with piloted in Odesa Law USAID support Academy and, currently under Indicator 55 regarding national Output Sep-16 0 3 2 1 TBD TBD the implementation in Yaroslav standards for legal Mudryi Law University education and 2. Rules of Procedure for implemented by law Mandatory, External, school Independent, Standardized, Entrance Exam (MEISEE) for master degree in law Law school administrators, faculty leadership, and instructors aware of and understand national strategy and standards for legal education and ER 4.1.2 accreditation

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 60

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Number of tertiary- level educators and 76 faculty who complete (women This period data refers to trainings on anti-corruption education for law Indicator 56 professional Output Sep-16 149 100 58%, 110 300 students and legal education quality development men assessment methodology activities with USG 42%) assistance. ER 4.1.3 Law schools revise policies, procedures, and legal education practices in compliance with national standards for legal education and accreditation In 2017 New Justice supported: 1. Donetsk National University Law School 2. Karazin Law School Number of host 3. Kyiv-Mohyla Law School country tertiary 4. Odesa Law Academy Indicator 54 education institutions 5. Kyiv Taras Shevchenko University Law School measures this receiving capacity Output Sep-16 10 12 9 14 15 20 6. Uzhorod National University ER development support Law School with USG assistance 7. Yuri Fedkovych Univercity (FAF ES.2-1) Law School 8. Zaporizhia National University Law 9. Lviv Catholic University Law School ER 4.1.4 A minimal standard and gold standard accreditation is adopted to increase competition among the law schools

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 61

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Number of policies and/or procedures developed with 2017 data counts the Methodology for Indicator 55 USAID support Independent, External, On-Site Assessment of Legal Education Quality measures this regarding national Output Sep-16 0 3 1 2 TBD TBD piloted in Odesa Law Academy and, ER standards for legal currently under the implementation in education and Yaroslav Mudryi Law University. implemented by law school S-O 4.2 Quality Assurance Frameworks for Law Schools Developed Policies and procedures for quality assurance frameworks based on international standards and comparative best practices adopted by leading ER 4.2.1 law schools Law school administrators, faculty leadership, instructors, and student government representatives trained on nature, scope, and operation of ER 4.2.2 QAF ER 4.2.3 Quality Assurance Units in leading law schools established and functioning Number of quality assurance units in law Indicator 57 schools established Output Sep-16 0 N/A N/A N/A 10 20 This output is expected in FY2018 and functioning with USAID support S-O 4.3 Quality Assurance Frameworks for Law Schools Developed Modern instructional methods adopted and implemented to ensure effective practice oriented, skills based learning and formally adopted into ER 4.3.1 school curriculum ER 4.3.2 Institutional curriculum effectively prepares law student for career in the Judiciary and other legal professions ER 4.3.3 Law school legal clinics (including specialized clinics) developed and integrated into formal curriculum

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 62

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Number of law schools implementing methodology of class 2017 data counts Odesa Law Academy Indicator 58 room effectiveness Output Sep-16 2 3 2 3 4 7 and Yaroslav Mudryi Law University. rating using USAID- developed methodology ER 4.3.4 Judicial clerkship program created in coordination with judicial self-governance bodies and courts Number of law schools implementing Indicator 59 Output Sep-16 0 N/A 0 1 2 3 No changes in 2017. judicial clerkship program ER 4.3.5 Independent, external examinations for law school admissions and graduation implemented. ER 4.3.6 Memorandum of Understanding concluded with key legal education partners to sustain USAID investments after the end of the Program. 2017 data counts MOUs with the following legal education partners: Number of legal 1. Kharkiv National Law education partners Academy named after Yaroslav concluded Mudryy Indicator 60 Output Sep-16 3 3 5 6 7 7 2. Chernivtsi Yuri Fedkovych memorandum of University Law School understanding with 3. L’viv Catholic University Law USAID. School 4. Ministry of Justice 5. Ministry of Education. Objective 5 Access to Justice Expanded and Human Rights Protected S-O 5.1 Justice Accessible to Citizens, including the Most Vulnerable

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 63

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Number of professionals trained to increase justice No changes in 2017. Activity started in Indicator 61 accessibilities (sign Output Sep-16 589 100 0 100 TBD 800 September 2017. language interpreters, judges, judicial personnel) Physical, geographic, cultural, financial, informational, legal and procedural barriers to the courts removed or lowered for all citizens, including ER 5.1.1 vulnerable groups ER 5.1.2 Citizens’ access to court information increased CRC annual index for accessibility of court Activity delay due to new court mapping Indicator 62 Outcome Sep-16 0.84 0.85 N/A 0.86 0.86 0.88 development. Next CRC round facility and access to scheduled for 2018. information ER 5.1.3 E-justice systems accessible to citizens to ease case filing, tracking, document submission; payment and other court procedures and transactions

CRC Score for Activity delay due to new court mapping Indicator 63 courts implementing Outcome Sep-16 0.76 0.8 N/A 0.84 0.86 0.88 development. Next CRC round e-justice scheduled for 2018. ER 5.1.4 Citizens access to court-annexed mediation/ADR processes developed under 3.3 increased Percent of CRC survey respondents Activity delay due to new court mapping Indicator 64 that indicate their Context Mar-17 TBD N/A N/A TBD TBD TBD development. Next CRC round awareness about scheduled for 2018. ADR opportunities Awareness of the rights of Persons with Disabilities, SGBV survivors, IDPs, veterans and other vulnerable groups is increased among judges, ER 5.1.5 judicial personnel and advocates ER 5.1.6 SGBV survivors, children and other vulnerable victims or witnesses afforded greater protections

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 64

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Percent of judges, judicial personnel and advocates annual survey respondents Baseline survey is underway. Results are Indicator 65 who acknowledge Outcome Jul-17 TBD N/A N/A TBD TBD TBD expected in Q1 of Program Year Two. applying their knowledge of the rights of vulnerable groups in their job ER 5.1.7 Citizens, including vulnerable groups, actively participate in access to justice reforms Number of vulnerable group representatives participating in No changes in 2017. Activity started in Indicator 66 Output Sep-16 50 60 0 75 150 150 project-supported September 2017. public events on access to justice reforms S-O 5.2 Human Rights Protected, especially the rights of the most vulnerable Number of human rights defenders No changes in 2017. Activity started in Indicator 67 Output Sep-16 0 40 0 50 100 150 trained and September 2017. supported Awareness of human rights and humanitarian law, how to exercise those rights, and the role of the courts in protecting human rights increased ER 5.2.1 among judges, judicial personnel and advocates ER 5.2.2 Increased number of human rights and humanitarian law cases resolved ER 5.2.3 Referral networks among judges, judicial personnel, advocates, social workers, health workers, police, and community leaders strengthened

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 65

Actual Indicator Baseline Baseline Target Target Target Target Log Frame ID Log Frame Statement Annual Notes and Explanations Level M - Y Value 2017 2018 2019 LOP 2017 Per cent of judges, judicial personnel and advocates who acknowledge their Baseline survey is underway. Results are Indicator 68 full or mostly full Outcome Jun-17 TBD N/A N/A TBD TBD TBD expected in Q1 of Program Year Two. awareness about the rights of vulnerable groups and humanitarian law Human rights coalitions monitor and successfully advocate the GOU, Judiciary, and Legal Aid Centers for increased protection of human rights ER 5.2.4 by the courts Number of policy paper proposals, reports, and assessments No changes in 2017. Activity started in Indicator 69 Output Sep-16 0 2 0 2 3 9 prepared by human September 2017. right coalition and submitted to GOU for consideration ER 5.2.5 Percent of judges who report their awareness of the Amicus Curie Institute Percent of judges who report their Baseline survey is underway. Results are Indicator 70 awareness of the Outcome Jan-18 TBD N/A N/A TBD TBD TBD expected in Q1 of Program Year Two. Amicus Curie Institute

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 66

REVISED PERFORMANCE INDICATOR REFERENCE SHEET

USAID Performance Indicator Reference Sheet Name of Indicator: 1) Ratio of Ukrainian justice system compliance with the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) Rule of Law Checklist Name of Result Measured (DO, IR, sub-IR, Project Purpose, Project Outcome, Project Output, etc.): DO1: More Participatory, Transparent and Accountable Government Processes IR1.1: Improved legislative and policy environment in line with European Standards IR1.3: The GOU (including the Judiciary) is more accountable to its citizens and the rule of law Activity Goal: Independent, accountable, transparent and effective justice system that upholds the rule of law and is empowered to fight corruption Is This a Performance Plan and Report Indicator? No If yes, link to foreign assistance framework: N/A DESCRIPTION Precise Definition(s): The European Commission for Democracy through Law - better known as the Venice Commission as it meets in Venice - is the Council of Europe's (CoE) advisory body. The role of the Venice Commission is to provide legal advice to its member states (Ukraine is CoE member state) and, in particular, to help states wishing to bring their legal and institutional structures into line with European standards and international experience in the fields of democracy, human rights and the rule of law. In 2016 Venice Commission adopted the Rule of Law Checklist which is intended to provide a tool for assessing the Rule of Law in a given country from the view point of its constitutional and legal structures, the legislation in force and the existing case- law. The checklist aims at enabling an objective, transparent and equal assessment. The Venice Commission recommends all CoE member states to use the develop Checklist on a regular base to assess rule of law state of affairs in a particular country involving a variety of actors in the assessment process – justice sector representatives, Parliament representatives, executives, civil society leaders etc. The Checklist consists of 162 benchmarks covering all rule of law issues. Out of them there are 55 benchmarks related to justice sector and correspond with Nove Pravosuddya program portfolio. Nove Pravosuddya will measure specifically Ukrainian justice sector compliance with this Checklist meaning that we will only take into consideration 74 related benchmarks. Samples of these benchmarks are: “Does the allocation of cases among judges follow objective and transparent criteria,” “Are specific measures in place against corruption in the judiciary (e.g. declaration of assets,” “Are there fair and sufficient salaries for judges” etc. Each benchmark will be assessed by Stakeholder Advisory Group (SAG) through simple 5-point qualitative scale where 1 = definitely no, the most negative, and 5= definitely yes, the most positive. The point 3 in this scale means a border between satisfactory and non-satisfactory level of compliance with benchmark. To calculate the ratio of compliance we will transfer the 5-point scale for each benchmark from each SAG member into ratio scale where 1 is equal 0.00, 2 is equal 0.25, 3 is equal 0.5, 4 is equal 0.75 and 5 is equal to 1. Based on SAG assessment of benchmarks we will calculate the integral ratio of compliance as total ratio score where the numerator is total ratio points received from SAG and denominator is the total possible maximum ratio points (e.g., hypothetical situation when all benchmarks assessed receive the highest point). Unit of Measure: ratio 0.00 (lowest) to 1.00 (highest). Data Type: Ratio. Two digits after decimal place. Numerator and denominator defined above. Disaggregated by: N/A Rationale for Indicator: Venice Commission Rule of Law Checklist directly measures the independence, accountability, transparency and effectiveness of justice system, its ability to upholds the rule of law and is to fight corruption. Besides, the majority of benchmarks in this tool correspond to Justice Sector Reform Strategy tasks which are currently under implementation in Ukraine. Thus, through application the Venice Commission Rule of Law Checklist we can also measure the progress of implementation mentioned above Strategy. PLAN FOR DATA COLLECTION Data Source: Nove Pravosuddya’ Stakeholder Advisory Group (SAG) Method of Data Collection and Construction: Survey of SAG members (on-line or paper survey), focus group discussion on survey result and vetting received scores Reporting Frequency: twice in Program Year One (baseline and Year end), annually every next year Responsible Individual(s): COP, DCOP, M&E Specialist TARGETS AND BASELINE

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 67

Baseline Timeframe: Initial assessment to be conducted by March 2017 Rationale for Targets (optional): when baseline data available, targets will set in consultation with SAG DATA QUALITY ISSUES Dates of Previous Data Quality Assessments and Name of Reviewer(s): N/A Date of Future Data Quality Assessments (optional): August 2017 Known Data Limitations: N/A CHANGES TO INDICATOR Changes to Indicator: N/A Other Notes (optional): N/A THIS SHEET LAST UPDATED ON: October 1, 2017

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 68

ANNEX B. MILESTONES PROGRESS REPORT

New Justice Work Plan for the Program Year One foresees 159 milestones under 80 Program Expected Results (ERs). Eight ERs do not have milestones for this Program Year because related activities are planned for next years, not the Year One. At the end of the Program Year One New Justice achieved 52 milestones. 60 milestones are in progress, e.g. related activity started and is underway. 47 milestones are pending as scheduled for the next Program Year. This annex provides the detailed listing of all Program Year One milestones and their current status.

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Program Goal: Independent, accountable, transparent and effective justice system that upholds the rule of law and is empowered to fight corruption

Objective 1: Judicial Independence and Self-Governance strengthened

Sub-Objective 1.1: Judicial independence established through reformed Constitutional, Statutory and Regulatory framework

Postponed till next work- Technical review of draft constitutional amendments planning period. New Justice 03/2018 Pending changed the estimated ER 1.1.1 Constitutional safeguards for related to human rights conducted completion date for this judicial independence strengthened in milestone. key areas, (including appointment, Joint PTP anti-corruption court study visit to Slovakia 11/2016 promotion, transfer, and discipline of Achieved and Bosnia designed and implemented 04/2017 judges), comply with international and European standards of judicial Draft concept paper for establishing the High 05/2017 Achieved independence, and reflect citizen input. Specialized Anti-Corruption Court developed Amendments to Article 375 of the Criminal Code 03/2017 Achieved drafted

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 69

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY New Justice conducted four regional discussions on ER1.1.2 Inclusive consultative processes establishing Anti-Corruption for developing and implementing Six seminars conducted to promote the new Court which directly touches an constitutional amendments, legislation, constitutional and legislative provisions with respect to 12/2017 In progress issue of judicial independence. and other normative acts related to judicial independence conducted More seminars on judicial judicial independence established. independence planned for next reporting period and first quarter of Program Year Two. Roundtable with key stakeholders on judicial Postponed till Program Year ER1.1.3 The Judiciary positively Two. New Justice changed the independence and the rule of the law conducted 03/2018 Pending influences the parliament and executive estimated completion date for branch in the development and this milestone. allocation of legislation affecting the Information campaign on judicial independence judiciary, including the judicial budget. 12/2017 In progress launched ER1.1.4 Legislation, regulations, and operating procedures to implement Public awareness campaign on judicial reform launched constitutional amendments related to 12/2017 In progress judicial independence adopted with public notice and consultation

Sub-Objective 1.2: Judicial Self-Governance Strengthened Judicial self-governance conference conducted ER 1.2.1 Authorities of Judicial self- 12/2016 Achieved governance bodies (e.g., the High Council of Justice, among others) clearly HCJ internal rules of procedure developed Will be part of BPA efforts. New Justice changed the defined and understood by judicial 06/2018 In progress leadership, judges, and judicial personnel. estimated completion date for this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 70

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY HCJ governance structure, including specialized HCJ established three committees, established specialized boards to ensure coordination within the judiciary Partly and with international donors, 09/2017 achieved however, it did not establish the "thematic" specialized committees New Justice was advocating for

Online tools to promote compliance with ethical Due to the fact that COJ’s work standards developed and expanded. was almost paralyzed because of HCJ election and Supreme Court selection this activity was 03/2018 Pending shifted to the next year. New ER 1.2.2 The Judiciary exerts leadership Justice changed the estimated in developing strategies, objectives, and completion date for this initiatives to effectively promote and milestone. protect its independence, while ensuring Up to up to six judicial forums on strengthening judicial First forum conducted under accountability, integrity, transparency independence and judicial administration conducted grant program in October 2017, and high ethical standards the remaining 5 will take place 03/2018 In progress later in 2017-2018. New Justice changed the estimated completion date for this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 71

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Judicial statistics take into account gender Working Group on improving disaggregation data judicial statistic established under SJA

New Justice provided Report with recommendations on 03/2019 In progress improving judicial reporting and statistic for better gender disaggregated data collection. New Justice changed the ER 1.2.3 Representation and leadership estimated completion date for of women judges in judicial governance this milestone. bodies and courts enhanced. Gender index for the judiciary Gender index for the judiciary developed 9/2017 Achieved developed Research on women judges as Research on women judges as leaders conducted 9/2017 Achieved leaders conducted Training curriculum for women judges on leadership APS issued, application is under and gender awareness developed consideration. New Justice 12/2017 In progress changed the estimated completion date for this milestone. Forum promoting a dialogue between the judiciary and 11/2016 Achieved ER 1.2.4 Participation and inclusion of civil society conducted judges, judicial personnel, advocates, and Two roundtable discussions aimed at promoting Related activity planned for next citizens in judicial governance year. New Justice changed the improved bar-bench relations conducted 03/2018 Pending strengthened. estimated completion date for this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 72

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Analyses and recommendations on the regulatory Report on the results of framework for judicial selection and qualifications independent monitoring of evaluation developed anonymous testing and case study provided, with Analyses 12/2017 In progress and Recommendations to improve the procedures. New Justice changed the estimated completion date for this milestone. ER 1.2.5 Judicial performance standards Test items for anonymous testing procedures for On January 17, NSJ transferred for merit-based testing, vetting, selecting new Supreme Court justices developed 01/2017 Achieved to the HQC developed and recruitment, performance evaluation, evaluated test items transfer, promotion, discipline, and Training for test item evaluators conducted 10/2016 Achieved lustration established. Tools for psychological and general abilities testing for New Justice hired respective judicial candidates and judges standardized experts and conducted piloting of psychological testing tools 12/2017 In progress with 362 judges . New Justice changed the estimated completion date for this milestone. Set of comprehensive materials on judicial selection and 12/2016 Achieved performance evaluation provided to the HCJ Report with recommendations on amending rules ER 1.2.6 Rules regarding corruption, regarding judicial corruption, violation of judicial ethics judicial ethics and illegal conduct, as well and illegal conduct of judges, judicial personnel, 04/2017 Achieved as related disciplinary sanctions and advocates and citizens prepared and disseminated enforcement procedures, strengthened.

Report on legal obstacles and disincentive mechanisms ER 1.2.7 Reporting of corruption, for reporting judicial corruption developed and 04/2017 Achieved unethical or illegal conduct simplified and disseminated

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 73

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY made more accessible for judges, judicial Survey on reporting judicial corruption and protection Survey among court staff is personnel, advocates, and citizens. of informers and whistleblowers conducted In progress underway and the results are expected within the 1st decade 12/2017 of November . New Justice changed the estimated completion date for this milestone. Informational materials on reporting judicial corruption New Justice moved the activity In progress to the next program period, as and protection and incentive mechanisms for those 10/2017 who report designed and disseminated it should be based on the survey results under ER 1.2.7 ER 1.2.8 Protections increased for Report with recommendations on legal mechanisms on individuals who report corruption, the protection and incentives for individuals who report 04/2017 Achieved unethical or illegal conduct against judicial corruption developed and disseminated judges, judicial personnel and advocates.

Sub-Objective 1.3: Judiciary exercises independence effectively ER 1.3.1 The Judiciary exercises Survey of judges on judicial independence and independence with regards to judges, accountability conducted 09/2017 Achieved personnel, budget authority, and other areas of judicial competence. Recommendations to improve the legal and regulatory New Justice expert provided framework for the PIC developed Report on the Public Integrity ER 1.3.2 The Judiciary effectively Council and the results applied exercises competencies in judicial by the High Qualifications testing, vetting, recruitment, Commission of Judges of 12/2017 In progress performance evaluation, transfer, Ukraine, APS issued, application promotion, discipline and lustration of is under consideration. New judges using merit-based system. Justice changed the estimated completion date for this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 74

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Roundtable to discuss the results of the selection of Planned for October 24 and 25, 2017. New Justice changed the new Supreme Court justices conducted 12/2017 In progress estimated completion date for this milestone. Monitoring of processes for judicial selection and New Justice involved a group of evaluation conducted monitors to conduct independent monitoring of anonymous testing and case study in February. Report 12/2017 In progress prepared and provided to the HQC. New Justice issued APS. New Justice changed the estimated completion date for this milestone.

Concept paper for establishing judicial testing center On June 1, 2017 NSJ established developed 9/2017 Achieved a Testing Center as a separate division at the NSJ ER 1.3.3 90% of Judicial testing, vetting, Analysis of the legislative and regulatory framework New Justice is in the process of recruitment, performance evaluation, regarding the online publication of information identifying respective expert. 03/2018 In progress New Justice changed the transfer, promotion, discipline and regarding the judicial selection, promotion and estimated completion date for lustration results published online. discipline developed this milestone. Report with recommendations on amending HCJ 06/2017 Achieved internal regulations developed ER 1.3.4 Implementation of ethics IT needs assessment of the HCJ conducted 06/2017 Achieved enforcement mechanisms strengthened. Curriculum for initial training of HCJ judicial inspectors 09/2017 Achieved developed ER 1.3.5 Judges, judicial personnel, and Roundtable on reporting judicial corruption by peers advocates change attitudes towards conducted 09/2017 Achieved reporting corruption, unethical or other illegal conduct by their peers.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 75

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY ER 1.3.6 Reporting of corruption, unethical or illegal conduct by judges, No activities planned for TBD N/A N/A judicial personnel, advocates and citizens FY2017 increased. ER 1.3.7 Protections for individuals who report corruption, unethical or illegal No activities planned for TBD N/A N/A conduct against judges, judicial personnel FY2017 and advocates applied. ER 1.3.8 Number of disciplinary measures against judges, judicial No activities planned for TBD N/A N/A personnel and advocates for corruption, FY2017 unethical or illegal conduct increased.

Sub-Objective 1.4: Improper and unlawful external influence on Judiciary reduced Curriculum was reviewed and NSJ decided to proceed with ER 1.4.1 Judicial decisions are based five different curricula, which Judicial opinion writing manual and curriculum updated are based on the Judicial opinion solely on the facts and law, and reversed 09/2017 Achieved writing curriculum. Judicial only through the appellate process. opinion writing manual was reviewed. These activities were conducted under ER 3.2.1. ER 1.4.2 Members of the Presidential International Standards for the Judiciary book updated International Standards for the Judiciary book was updated and Administration, Government and and broadly disseminated 09/2017 Achieved Parliament engage the Judiciary in a published. These activities were constructive manner that respects conducted under ER 3.2.1. judicial independence and refrains from At least one mechanism for bar-bench cooperation improperly or unlawfully interfering with established Postponed till next work- 09/2018 Pending the impartiality of judicial decision- planning period making and professional conduct.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 76

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY ER 1.4.3 Sufficient resources are Assessment report on the resources needed to protect This activity was canceled to allocated to protect judges and judicial judges and judicial personnel from threats, intimidation, leverage the resources with other donors. In next work- personnel from threats such as and violence drafted 09/2018 Pending planning periods it will be harassment, assault, and other forms of reviewed to address the needs intimidation and violence. of the stakeholders ER 1.4.4 Judges are empowered to Standardized form and guidelines for judges and court report improper or illegal interference in staff to report improper or illegal interference Postponed till next work- 04/2018 Pending their judicial decision making and developed planning period conduct.

Objective 2: Accountability and Transparency of the Judiciary to Citizens and the Rule of Law Increased

Sub-Objective 2.1: Transparency by the Judiciary Increased Up to 5 participants of “Limits of Transparent Justice” New Justice supported conference supported participation of two COJ 12/2016 Achieved members in “Limits of ER 2.1.1 Increased awareness among Transparent Justice” citizens of the right to and limitations of Conference judicial transparency in courtroom Related activity will start in Public awareness campaign designed and implemented 12/2017 Pending proceedings and judicial governance. September 2017 Related activity will start in “Judicial Images” conference conducted 12/2017 Pending September 2017 ER 2.1.2 Increased public access to Public awareness campaigns regarding the HCJ and Related activity will start in 12/2017 Pending courtroom and judicial governance HQC conducted September 2017 proceedings in-person, on-line, via Audio and visual needs assessment regarding HCJ and Related activity will start in TV/radio, or through archived HQC conducted 12/2017 Pending recordings and records. September 2017 Regional series of training programs for judge-speakers Related activity will start in 12/2017 Pending ER 2.1.3 Increased outreach by the and PIOs conducted September 2017 Judiciary to the public and press. Related activity will start in Job descriptions for judge-speakers and PIOs updated 12/2017 Pending September 2017

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 77

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY ER 2.1.4 90% completion of financial and Number of judicial declarations published online asset declarations by judges and judicial New Justice changed the increased 03/2018 In progress estimated completion date for personnel, with 90% of judicial financial this milestone. and asset declarations published online.

Sub-Objective 2.2: Horizontal Accountability -Checks and Balances on the Judiciary by other Branches of Government strengthened Monitoring of the judicial vetting process conducted New Justice selected grantee which is concluding the monitoring of the progress. ER 2.2.1 Lustration process concludes 03/18 In progress without violations of due process or New Justice changed the human rights of lustrated judges and estimated completion date for judicial personnel. this milestone. Results of the monitoring of the lustration of public officials 03/18 In progress Same as above conducted and discussed International and European best practices in preventing Dr. Tilman Hoppe completed judicial corruption identified and shared analysis of the legislation covering the conflict of interest in the justice sector and come up with the initial draft report that was presented to and ER 2.2.2 Judiciary coordinates with the 03/18 In progress NAPC to develop and implement discussed with the key corruption-prevention measures within counterparts; expert is finalizing the document now. the Judiciary New Justice changed the estimated completion date for this milestone. NAPC capacity to implement measures to prevent 03/18 In progress Same as above judicial corruption assessed

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 78

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Dialogue between the NAPC and judiciary established New Justice Program hired Ms. Victoria Jennet who assessed and presented corruption risks 03/18 In progress in the justice sector. New Justice changed the estimated completion date for this milestone. International and European best practices in ER 2.2.3 Judiciary facilitates NABU and Same as above investigating judicial corruption collected and 03/18 In progress Prosecutor General’s Office investigations into alleged corruption or disseminated other illicit conduct by judges or judicial NABU capacity to investigate corruption related cases 03/18 In progress Same as above personnel judges assessed New Justice hired Sanja ER 2.2.4 Judiciary coordinates with Report with international and European best practices Popovich, legislation drafting parliamentary oversight committees, expert who delivered training to related to effective communications between the with due respect for judicial 03/18 In progress the members of the HCJ and judiciary and Parliament drafted and disseminated independence and freedom from authorized personnel on interference. Analysis of the Draft Laws and Advisory Opinion Writing

Sub-Objective 2.3: Social Accountability - Judiciary Held Accountable by Citizens, Civil Society and Independent Media Assessment of CSO capacity to monitor and contribute 08/17 Achieved to the implementation of judicial reform completed New Justice issued APS ER 2.3.1 Citizens and CSOs actively Up to four CSO projects on monitoring judicial encouraging CSO application for participate in and monitor judicial performance evaluation, selection and discipline as well as overall judicial reform implemented. grants funding aimed at reform processes at the local and monitoring of judicial 05/18 In progress national levels. performance evaluation, selection, discipline and other judicial reform issues. Concept papers from CSO collected. Results of 2015-2016 CRC surveys in courts analyzed CRC surveys postponed to the 03/18 Pending and communicated. next Program Year because SJA

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 79

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY CRC surveys conducted in at least 150 courts that is preparing new court map, e.g. 03/18 Pending ER 2.3.2 Court operations improved participate in this initiative first time consolidating smaller raion and district courts in circuit courts. through direct citizen feedback (e.g., Court staff in at least 100 courts learned how to New Justice changed estimated CRCs) conduct CRC surveys and utilize their results 03/18 Pending completion date for these milestones. ER 2.3.3 Formal linkages between civil At least five formal linkages between judicial reform society and judicial, governmental and oriented CSO and their GOU partners newly Four CSO partners signed 16 parliamentary institutions established 09/17 Achieved MOUs with GOU and local established or strengthened (through, e.g., MOUS or joint strategies government entities and action plans). ER 2.3.4 Citizen awareness of judicial Information materials updated This activity will be conducted in 09/2018 Pending reform and corruption increased. the next work-planning period. GOUs capacity to provide citizens with effective tools New Justice conducted tender to report corruption in the judiciary assessed. and selected the company that will conduct respective public 03/18 In progress opinion survey in the next reporting period. New Justice changed estimated completion ER 2.3.5 Citizen reports to anti- date for this milestone. corruption organizations and agencies Survey of the public awareness on corruption reporting 09/17 Achieved increased. procedures and mechanisms conducted Public awareness materials on effective reporting of the Postponed. To be conducted corruption in the judiciary developed, published and after the survey is completed and results of it are processed. disseminated 03/18 Pending New Justice changed estimated completion date for this milestone. Baseline organizational capacity score for judicial ER 2.3.6 Judicial-reform oriented CSOs reform oriented CSOs calculated and verified by 08/17 Achieved organizational capacity score increased. Stakeholder Advisory Group

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 80

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Online training program on organizational capacity Related activity started in September 2017. New Justice development for judicial reform oriented designed and 12/17 In progress implemented changed estimated completion date for this milestone. Bar Professional Conduct Rules revised Preliminary discussions with the ER 2.3.7 Professional associations and 09/2018 Pending National Bar Association Bar associations increase capacity for conducted self-regulation and professional standards Survey of lawyers conducted Preliminary discussions with the among members. 12/2017 Pending National Bar Association conducted Regional series of training programs for journalists Related activities will start next ER 2.3.8 Quality and volume of year. New Justice changed conducted 03/2018 Pending investigative journalism and other media estimated completion date for reporting on corruption, judicial this milestone. misconduct, judicial reforms, high-profile Courts and Media Manual for Journalists updated and Related activities will start next court cases, and other rule of law issues year. New Justice changed disseminated 03/2018 Pending increased. estimated completion date for this milestone. CSO monitoring of financial asset declarations Annual Program Statement ER 2.3.9 Media and CSOs analyze and submitted by judges and court staff conducted published. Potential CSO partners are currently publicize financial and asset declarations 05/18 Pending developing Concepts to support compared to actual lifestyle. the activity related to this milestone.

Objective 3: Administration of Justice Enhanced

Sub-Objective 3.1: Judicial Administration Institutions, Policies, and Procedures Strengthened Coordination of activities between HCJ and COJ ER 3.1.1 Judicial administration bodies takes place in a structured and sustainable HCJ established coordination function in more coherent and 09/2017 Achieved format councils coordinated fashion.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 81

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY IFJSE presented and discussed with members of the Presented, discussion pending. New Justice changed estimated HCJ, COJ and SJA 12/2017 In progress completion date for this milestone. ER 3.1.2 Strategies, policies, and procedures for managing court Analytical report on best international practices in the CEPEJ recommendations operations, and providing quality field of court consolidation prepared and submitted to translated and provided to SJA, services to the public implemented. the HCJ, COJ and SJA round table conducted on 12/2017 In progress October 17-18, 2017. New Justice changed estimated completion date for this milestone. Two TORs for Business Process Analysis for the HCJ 1 ToR for HCJ prepared. New Justice changed estimated and the courts prepared, service providers identified 12/2017 In progress ER 3.1.3 Courts equipped with and use completion date for this IT and e-justice systems to improve milestone. efficiency of workflow, case management Two study tours conducted for HCJ and SJA staff to and accessibility to services. Moldova and Bosnia and Herzegovina to study 04/2017 Achieved successful international court automation experiences Up to six regional discussions to promote the First under grant program will experience of the e-Court project conducted take place on November 6, 03/2018 In progress 2017. New Justice changed ER 3.1.4 Courts hear and conclude cases estimated completion date for this milestone. in a timely manner and without undue delays. Reasons for delays in court proceedings evaluated, Will be part of the BPA. New Justice changed estimated recommendations for improvement prepared and 12/2017 Pending submitted to the HCJ, COJ and SJA completion date for this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 82

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY ER 3.1.5 Judicial budgeting, financial First seminar conducted on July management, internal controls and Two seminars for court personnel responsible for 20-21, 2017, second will happen in the next Program Year. New external auditing improved and budgeting and finance on best international practices in 12/2017 In progress Justice changed estimated compliant with national laws and court budgeting and statistics conducted completion date for this international best practice milestone. ER 3.1.6 Judicial procurement systems Processes and procedures currently governing court Will happen in the next more transparent and compliant with procurement evaluated, and recommendations Program Year. New Justice 03/2018 Pending national laws and international best prepared and submitted to COJ, SJA and HCJ changed estimated completion practices date for this milestone.

Sub-Objective 3.2: Professional Competencies and Expertise of Judges and Judicial Personnel Improved Judicial training program on anti-corruption issues and Will happen in the next Program Year. New Justice handling corruption cases updated 09/2017 Pending changed estimated completion date for this milestone. Training program for newly appointed judges of the An Orientation Training ER 3.2.1 NSJ methodologies, core Supreme Court of Ukraine developed Program for the newly curriculum, and trainers strengthened appointed Supreme Court and meet international standards. Justices developed and will be implemented starting from 12/2017 In progress November 14 through November 23, 2017. New Justice changed estimated completion date for this milestone. Course for chief judges on Courts and Community Will happen in the next Program Year. New Justice Communications developed 03/2018 Pending ER 3.2.2 Judges and judicial assistants changed estimated completion trained in core substantive and date for this milestone. procedural law, judicial ethics, Course for judge-speakers on Courts and Community Will happen in the next leadership, and management. Program Year. New Justice Communications developed 03/2018 Pending changed estimated completion date for this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 83

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Up to 80 court administrators share their experience, 03/17 Achieved approaches, and results on capstone project

implementation in their courts. Agreement signed on design and implementation of the academic certificate course on judicial administration New Justice changed estimated 12/17 between Karazin Kharkiv National University, Yaroslav In progress completion date for this

Mudryi National Law University and Michigan State milestone. University

ER 3.2.3 Judicial personnel demonstrate University faculty recruited for the academic certificate Waiting for finalizing SOW and subcontract with US University course on judicial administration 03/18 Pending competencies in key areas of to be signed. New Justice management and operational support. changed estimated completion date for this milestone. Teaching plan prepared for the academic certificate Waiting for finalizing SOW and subcontract with US University course on judicial administration 03/18 Pending to be signed. New Justice

changed estimated completion date for this milestone. Achieved Participation of up to 5 judicial leaders in the IACA 09/17

Eighth International Conference supported

ER 3.2.4 Attitude of judges and judicial personnel of themselves and their peers No activities planned for is positive (e.g., self-image as honest, TBD N/A N/A FY2017 professional, performing a public service, not-corrupt). ER 3.2.5 By the end of the Program, the NSJ is able to provide high-quality, No activities planned for modern, professional development TBD N/A N/A FY2017 services to judges and judicial personnel with limited donor support.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 84

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY

Sub-Objective 3.3: Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Strengthened Strategy and Recommendations developed and The activities postponed for the presented to Ukrainian stakeholders for how mediation next work planning period. It ER 3.3.1 Comprehensive analyses of would be best implemented in Ukraine caused by the upcoming current context, barriers and 06/2018 Pending amendments to the procedural opportunities for developing mediation legislation. New Justice changed and other ADR processes in Ukraine estimated completion date for completed. this milestone. Achieved Conference on Online Dispute Resolution conducted 09/2017

Two discussions of a draft Law on Mediation conducted Will happen in the next Program Year. New Justice ER 3.3.2 Normative (legislative, 06/2018 Pending regulatory) framework for mediation and changed estimated completion other ADR processes strengthened date for this milestone. consistent with international best Up to 15 representatives of Ukrainian stakeholders 11 representatives of Ukrainian practices. participated in a Study Tour to the Superior Court of 06/2017 Achieved stakeholders participated in this the District of Columbia in Washington, DC Study Visit A working group developed a A working group to develop consolidated approaches draft Code of Conduct for ER 3.3.3 Professional association for to rules of conduct, accreditation procedure, selection Mediators. mediators and other ADR practitioners 03/2018 In progress The Code was discussed in 10 and trainings of mediators, monitoring of their strengthened. regions of Ukraine. New Justice activities, continuous trainings created changed estimated completion date for this milestone. ER 3.3.4 Professional knowledge, 16 representatives of regional free legal aid centers and Will happen in the next Program Year. New Justice expertise, and integrity of mediators NGOs participated in training on mediation skills and 03/2018 Pending changed estimated completion enhanced earned certificates date for this milestone. ER 3.3.5 Mediation and other ADR Will happen in the next Mediation information campaign developed Program Year. New Justice processes integrated into the legal 03/2018 Pending changed estimated completion culture and court processes. date for this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 85

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY ER 3.3.6 Use of mediation and other No activities planned for ADR processes in civil and commercial TBD N/A N/A FY2017 cases increased.

Sub-Objective 3.4: System of Enforcement of Judgments Improved Conduct a review of the legislative framework for Involved international experts to enforcement of judgements based on the best share experience with the first international and European practices 07/18 In progress PEAs of Ukraine. New Justice ER 3.4.1 Normative framework for changed estimated completion enforcement of judgments revised. date for this milestone.

Recommendations on improving enforcement 07/18 In progress Same as above processes and procedures provided ER 3.4.2 Rules and procedures for No activities planned for licensing, oversight, and assignment of TBD N/A N/A FY2017 private enforcement agents adopted. Supported MOJ in conducting regional congresses of Private Enforcement Agents that ER 3.4.3 Association of Enforcement Foreign expertise to support establishment of the selected Regional Councils of PEAs and delegates to the First Agents established and cadre of private Association of Enforcement Agents provided 06/18 In progress National Conference of PEAs. enforcement agents trained and certified. New Justice changed estimated completion date for this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 86

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Supported MOJ in certifying first batch of PEAs and conducted ER 3.4.4 Enforcement agents equipped First International Conference with the necessary systems, tools, and for PEAs to share best European sufficient budgetary support to manage Enforcement agents provided with the best 06/18 In progress practices and procedural case load and adequately care for assets international tools for enforcement of judgements standards with them. New under their supervision. Justice changed estimated completion date for this milestone.

ER 3.4.5 Judgments are enforced in a Baseline for the enforcement of judgements identified 06/18 In progress Same as above timely and effective manner. Objective 4: Quality of Legal Education Strengthened

Sub-Objective 4.1: National Strategy and Standards for Legal Education and Accreditation Adopted Draft Legal Education Reform Concept Paper improved New Justice Local Legal and prepared for the Cabinet of Ministers’ approval Education Policy Expert Yuri Barabash prepared the Report on Analysis of the Draft ER 4.1.1 National education strategy and Legal Education Reform standards for legal education and Concept Paper in Light of accreditation adopted by Ministry of Stakeholder Feedback. New 03/18 In progress Justice presented the report to Education, with input the MOJ and key the MOE, the MOJ and other stakeholders including representatives of legal education stakeholders and civil society. advocated for revitalization of the WG on Legal Education Reform. New Justice changed estimated completion date for this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 87

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Draft Legal Education Reform Action Plan developed New Justice Local Legal Education Policy Expert Yuri Barabash developed an initial 03/18 In progress draft Legal Education Reform Action Plan. New Justice changed estimated completion date for this milestone. Draft Legal Education Standards improved based on the MOE WG on Legal Education Legal Education Reform Concept Paper and regional Standards submitted the stakeholder discussions and prepared for the MOE updated version of the draft BA approval 03/18 In progress Legal Education Standard for the MOE approval. New Justice changed estimated completion date for this milestone. Three regional presentations and roundtable legal In addition to the planned education stakeholder discussions on the draft Legal regional discussions, New Justice also supported the Education Reform Concept Paper in Kharkiv, 11/16 Achieved Chernivtsi, and Dnipro conducted discussions of the draft Legal Education Reform Concept Paper in Odesa and Vinnitsia. ER 4.1.2 Law school administrators, Three regional presentations and roundtable legal Waiting for the Legal Education faculty leadership, and instructors aware education stakeholder discussions on the National Legal Standards to be adopted. New of and understand national strategy and Education Standards in Kharkiv, Lviv, and Odesa 06/18 Pending Justice changed estimated standards for legal education and conducted completion date for this accreditation. milestone. Up to four TOTs on implementing the National Legal Waiting for the National Legal Education Standards for law school administrators, Education Standards to be adopted. New Justice changed faculty leadership, instructors, and students 06/18 Pending representing at least 10 Ukraine's leading law schools estimated completion date for this milestone. nationwide conducted

ER 4.1.3 Law schools revise policies, External, independent, onsite assessment of legal Presentation of the Assessment education quality at the NUOLA conducted 03/17 Achieved Report with Recommendations procedures, and legal education will take place on May 29, 2017.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 88

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY practices in compliance with national CNU and NUOLA revised their policies, procedures Odesa Law Academy prepared standards for legal education and and legal education practices in light of the ESG, best its Action Plan for accreditation. international legal education practices, and national Implementation of New Justice’s standards for legal education and accreditation Expert Recommendations following the external, independent, on-site assessment Achieved of Odesa Law University in 09/17 March 2017. CNU set up with New Justice's support its Legal Education Quality Assurance Unit working on revising the law school policies and practices. These are first stepts, further support is required. Report on Practices of Bar Associations in Advancing 11/2016 Achieved Legal Education presented to Ukrainian bar associations ER 4.1.4 A minimal standard and gold standard accreditation is adopted to Draft Methodology for Public Accreditation of New Justice is working on a increase competition among the law Ukrainian Law Schools based on the objective, pre- grant proposal from the schools. established criteria developed 06/18 In progress Association of Ukrainian Lawyers in the framework of the Annual Program Statement. Sub-Objective 4.2: Quality Assurance Frameworks for Law Schools Developed Study tour to the U.S.A. for up to 15 policy-makers, ER 4.2.1 Policies and procedures for representatives of leading Ukrainian law schools, and quality assurance frameworks based on Ukrainian bar associations aimed at learning policies and international standards and comparative 09/17 Achieved procedures for comprehensive legal education quality best practices adopted by leading law assurance conducted schools.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 89

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY First TOT conducted for 18 Up to four TOTs on nature, scope, and application of administrators and faculty ER 4.2.2 Law school administrators, the ESG and the ESG-based Methodology for External, representing the MOE, the faculty leadership, instructors, and Independent, On-Site Assessment of Legal Education National Agency for Higher student government representatives Quality for law school administrators, faculty 02/18 In progress Education Quality Assurance, trained on nature, scope, and operation leadership, instructors, and student government the State Inspection of Higher of QAF. members representing at least 10 Ukraine's leading law Education Institutions, and eight schools conducted leading law schools on May 30- 31, 2017 in Odesa. Two Quality Assurance Units established and functioning at Draft concept paper on a model Legal Education ER 4.2.3 Quality Assurance Units in Odesa Law Academy and the Quality Assurance Unit and its business processes leading law schools established and 09/17 Achieved Yuri Fedkovych Law School developed functioning. (Chernivtsi) with New Justice's support.

Sub-Objective 4.3: Practice Oriented and Skills Based Instruction, Curriculum, and Activities Integrated

ER 4.3.1 Modern instructional methods Concept and draft curriculum for the certificate The SOW for the subcontract adopted and implemented to ensure program in rule of law developed to develop the curriculum published and the Subcontractor effective practice oriented, skills based 05/2018 In progress selected. New Justice changed learning and formally adopted into estimated completion date for school curriculum. this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 90

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Up to two basic TOT on modern methods of New Justice devoted one interactive teaching and learning the law for law school section of the May 30-31 faculty and student self-governance members workshop on the Methodology representing at least 10 Ukraine’s leading law schools for External, Independent, On- site Assessment of Legal conducted Achieved Education Quality for 18 07/17 administrators and faculty to

interactive teaching methods and skills-based education. Further, New Justice conducted in July 2017 a workshop on developing experiential criminal law and procedure courses. Capacity of up to four Ukraine’s leading law schools to Ukrainian component syllabus of deliver high-quality anti-corruption education enhanced the international anti-corruption and the international online anticorruption course in up course developed. International to four of Ukraine’s leading law schools implemented in academic anti-corruption workshop conducted in Kyiv on cooperation with the W&L April 13-14, 2017. The 06/17 Achieved international and local components of the anticorruption course taught. Concepts an action plans for anti-corruption community service projects developed. Draft Rules of Procedure for the implementation of the New Justice will continue to CNU Law School Honor Code developed work with the CNU Law School 03/18 In progress on developing rules of procedure for its Honor Committee.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 91

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Assistance in conducting up to 12 events aimed at New Justice jointly with the raising public awareness about global trends in the Ukrainian Catholic University understanding of the rule of law provided Rule of Law Center conducted seven public lectures on crosscutting rule of law issues related to legal reforms in a democratic society, engaging 09/17 Achieved over 290 law students, academics, legal practitioners, and public officials who attended the events in dialogues with international experts, while live broadcast attracted over 4,300 unique online viewers.

Chernivtsi Department of the Student Anticorruption The Student Anticorruption Action Center’s capacity to fight corruption in the Action Center representatives academia strengthened benefited from the international anticorruption online course 06/17 Achieved and the April 13-14, 2017 international academic anticorruption workshop in Kyiv. New Justice analyzed best practices and lessons learned as Draft concept paper on the nature, mandate, and to establishing and functioning of ER 4.3.2 Institutional curriculum operations of Law School Boards of External Advisors Law School boards of External effectively prepares law student for Advisors. aimed to ensure the law school curriculum effectively 03/18 In progress career in the Judiciary and other legal Advocating for Ukrainian bar prepares law students for career in the judiciary and professions. associations to enter in other legal professions developed cooperation with law schools on this matter.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 92

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Report on international and European best practices of managing and monitoring the legal clinics presented to 04/2017 Achieved Reflected in this QR. stakeholders Draft Model Clinical Legal Education Program New Justice changed estimated developed and reviewed using international expertise 06/2018 Pending completion date for this milestone. Standards for Legal Clinics reviewed using international 04/2017 Achieved expertise ER 4.3.3 Law school legal clinics Draft Regulation on Legal Clinics reviewed using The Draft Regulation with the (including specialized clinics) developed New Justice’s expert’s input was international expertise 05/2017 Achieved and integrated into formal curriculum. approved by the WG and is under MOJ review. Draft Concept Paper on Anticorruption Legal Clinic This milestone will not be developed achieved in Year 1 due to failure of the Parliament to adopt the respective legislation on the 06/2018 Pending Anti-Corruption Court, etc. New Justice changed estimated completion date for this milestone. Report on international and European best practices for Due to the fact that COJ’s work organizing and managing judicial clerkship programs was almost paralyzed because of ER 4.3.4 Judicial clerkship program presented to stakeholders HCJ election and Supreme Court selection this activity was created in coordination with judicial self- 06/2018 Pending shifted to the next year. New governance bodies and courts. Justice changed estimated completion date for this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 93

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Guidelines for judicial clerkship programs developed by Due to the fact that COJ’s work the joint working group was almost paralyzed because of HCJ election and Supreme Court selection this activity was 06/2018 Pending shifted to the next year. New Justice changed estimated completion date for this milestone. On August 3, 2017, the UCEE successfully administered MEISEE for 16,081 candidates at 75 venues all over Ukraine. The exam consisted of three sub- tests: critical, analytical, and logical thinking test akin to the Mandatory, external, independent, standardized Law School Admission Test ER 4.3.5 Independent, external entrance exam (MEISEE) for master’s degree programs (LSAT) in the United States, examinations for law school admissions 08/2017 Achieved legal knowledge test, and a in law implemented nationwide and graduation implemented. foreign language (English, German or French) test. The UCEQE automatically processed the answer sheets and announced the exam results on August 15, 2017. As a result, 12,856 (nearly 80%) of candidates passed the exam.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 94

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY New Justice concluded the Protocols of Cooperation (PoC) with the MOE, the MOJ, the Yaroslav Mudryi Law University, the Ukrainian Catholic University (Lviv) as well as started negotiations as to Memorandums of Understanding with key legal ER 4.3.6 Memorandum of Understanding education reform stakeholders to ensure smooth concluding PoCs with other Ukrainian leading law schools, concluded with key legal education implementation of the USAID Nove Pravosyddya 09/2017 Achieved namely the Taras Shevchenko partners to sustain USAID investments Program and sustainability of USAID investments after Law School (Kyiv), the Yuri after the end of the Program. the end of the Program executed Fedkovych Law School (Chernivtsi), Odesa Law Academy (Odesa), and the Vasyl Stus Law School (Vinnitsia). New Justice expects to conclude the PoCs with these and other law schools during the next reporting period. Objective 5: Access to Justice Expanded and Human Rights Protected

Sub-Objective 5.1: Justice Accessible to Citizens, including the Most Vulnerable Results of previous CRC surveys in Ukrainian courts ER 5.1.1 Physical, geographic, cultural, 03/18 Pending regarding barriers in access to courts analyzed financial, informational, legal and CRC survey results analysis procedural barriers to the courts Recommendations to remove or lower barriers to postponed till next Program removed or lowered for all citizens, access courts developed and communicated to the 03/18 Pending Year due to changes in court including vulnerable groups. GOU mapping through consolidation of smaller courts in larger circuit Results of previous CRC surveys in Ukrainian courts 03/18 Pending courts. New Justice changed ER 5.1.2 Citizens’ access to court regarding access to court information analyzed estimated completion date for this milestone. information increased. Recommendations to improve access to court 03/18 Pending information developed and communicated to GOU

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 95

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Expert evaluation of three e-courts in Odessa oblast New Justice completed expert regarding their systems accessibility to citizens 06/17 Achieved evaluation of three pilot e- completed courts in Odesa Oblast. ER 5.1.3 E-justice systems accessible to Expert recommendations to improve e-court services Court performance evaluation expert is currently developing citizens to ease case filing, tracking, accessibility developed and communicated to HCJ, SJA and courts set of recommendations to document submission; payment and improve e-courts. New Justice other court procedures and will submit these 12/18 In progress transactions. recommendations to HCJ, COJ and SJA in the next Program Year, the estimated completion date for this milestone changed accordingly. ER 5.1.4 Citizens access to court- No activities planned for annexed mediation/ADR processes TBD N/A N/A FY2017 developed under 3.3 increased. Grant issued to conduct monitoring of access to the courts and court services for people with disabilities APS issued. New Justice changed (PWD) and support activities on awareness of PWD 03/18 In progress estimated completion date for

rights among judges though design and implementation this milestone. of the program on increasing communication skills in work with PWD for judges. ER 5.1.5 Awareness of the rights of APS issued. New Justice changed Persons with Disabilities, SGBV Grant issued to train and certify sign language court 03/18 In progress estimated completion date for survivors, IDPs, veterans and other interpreters. vulnerable groups is increased among this milestone. judges, judicial personnel and advocates. Grant issued on awareness of the rights of SGBV APS issued. New Justice changed 03/18 survivors, IDPS, veterans and other vulnerable groups In progress estimated completion date for

among judges, judicial personnel and advocates. this milestone. Grant issued to support elimination of LGBTI APS issued. New Justice changed 03/18 communities discrimination and to ensure better In progress estimated completion date for

protection of their rights through the courts this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 96

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Roundtable to discuss status and needs of the judicial authorities in preparation of implementation of the Postponed to the next Program 03/18 Year. New Justice changed COE Convention on Preventing and Combating Pending estimated completion date for Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (COE this milestone. Istanbul Convention) after its ratification conducted Grant issued to support NSJ in developing training APS issued, application is under 03/18 consideration. New Justice course for judges on implementation of the COE In progress Istanbul Convention changed estimated completion date for this milestone. Research on access to justice for SGBV victims affected ER 5.1.6 SGBV survivors, children and by conflicts: international experience and 09/2017 Achieved other vulnerable victims or witnesses recommendations for Ukraine conducted afforded greater protections. Event to discuss needs and problems of SGBV New Justice conducted an event survivors, children and other vulnerable victims or on July 18, 2017. New Justice witnesses afforded greater access to justice conducted expert had a presentation on 09/2017 Achieved access to justice for SGBV victims affected by conflicts: international experience and recommendations for Ukraine Training curricula for judges and judicial personnel on Postponed to the next Program 03/18 Year. New Justice changed the implementation of UN SCR 1325, access to justice for Pending GBV and SGBV survivors developed estimated competion date for this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 97

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY Community Justice Center concept paper developed Participants of June 2017 ADR and presented to the GOU and Ukrainian civil society Study Tour to the U.S. visited the of Red Hook Community Justice Center (CJC) in New York, N.Y. and started preparation of Ukraine’ CJC 03/18 In progress model. Estimated completion ER 5.1.7 Citizens, including vulnerable groups, actively participate in access to date for this milestone revised justice reforms. from Sep 2017 to Dec 2017. Linked with the ER 3.3.2. New Justice changed the estimated competion date for this milestone.

Paralegal training program developed

Sub-Objective 5.2: Human Rights Protected, especially the rights of the most vulnerable

New Justice presented ER 5.2.1 Awareness of human rights and recommendations on improving humanitarian law, how to exercise those Training curricula for judges on application of the IHL ability of judges to apply IHL in rights, and the role of the courts in and protection of the rights of the most vulnerable in conflict-related court cases, 03/18 In progress based on the analysis of national protecting human rights increased conflict context developed court practice. New Justice among judges, judicial personnel and changed the estimated advocates competion date for this milestone. New Justice supported MOJ in launching the national information campaign I HAVE A ER 5.2.2 Increased number of human National practice on execution of the ECHR RIGHT! aimed to raise public rights and humanitarian law cases judgements improved 03/18 In progress awareness about human rights resolved and access to justice. New Justice changed the estimated competion date for this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 98

Estimated Expected Result Milestone Statement Completion Status Notes and Explanations MM/YY New Justice in cooperation with the International Renaissance Foundation organized the training for trainers on developing paralegal institute in ER 5.2.3 Referral networks among Referral networks among judges, judicial personnel, Ukraine, provided consultations judges, judicial personnel, advocates, advocates, social workers, health workers, and police with the trainers of the program 03/18 In progress social workers, health workers, police, and community leaders are in place and suggested the most and community leaders strengthened appropriate term to be used for the position title with respect to paralegal servants in Ukraine. New Justice changed the estimated competion date for this milestone. New Justice supported 10 CSOs ER 5.2.4 Human rights coalitions Up to three CSOs selected and supported in to monitor enforcement of the monitor and successfully advocate the law and protection of human monitoring and advocating for human rights protection GOU, Judiciary, and Legal Aid Centers 03/18 In progress rights by the court. New Justice by the courts for increased protection of human rights changed the estimated by the courts. competion date for this milestone. New Justice conducted the MOJ leadership development retreat “Personal and Organizational Road to Change” aimed to ER 5.2.5 Judiciary coordinates regularly define culture of the MOJ and its with the Human Rights Ombudsman and Partnership among judiciary and key human rights importance to employees’ other key human rights institutions to leadership development and institutions strengthened 03/18 In progress improve the protection of human rights professional identity, to and humanitarian law through the determine and develop courts. participants’ individual change inspirations. New Justice changed the estimated competion date for this milestone.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 99

ANNEX C. PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE New Justice received a categorical exclusion which is referenced in the project’s Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) which a part of the Annex 1 – Request for Categorical Exclusion of the Task Order. The IEE’s language provides a justification for the categorical exclusion as denoted below (page 4 of IEE):

2. Justification for Categorical Exclusion Determination The activities under the Democracy and Governance Development Objective Agreement (DOAG) will not have an effect on the natural or physical environment and are among the classes of activities listed in 22 CFR 216.2(c)(2). Therefore, under §216.2(c)(1), neither an IEE nor an EA will be required for these activities.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 100

ANNEX D. COUNTERPARTS AND BENEFICIARIES ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine • The Parliament of Ukraine - the High: Chairman - Andriy Parubiy (VR) sole body of legislative power in Ukraine The Verkhovna Rada is responsible for Address: 5, Hrushevskogo St., Kyiv, 01008, (National policymaker) • Participates in formation of the adoption of the laws of Ukraine http://iportal.rada.gov.ua/en judiciary – appointment of one- third of the Constitutional Court composition, lifetime appointment of judges • Principal New Justice’s counterparts - the VR Legal Policy and Justice Committee

Presidential Administration • Administrative office of the High: Head - Ihor Rainin (PA) President of Ukraine • Established to provide • The main state body formulating all Address: 11, Bankova St., Kyiv, 01220, (National policymaker) organizational, legal, advisory, national policies regarding the judiciary Tel.: +03 (044) 255 7333, informational, expert and http://www.president.gov.ua/en/ analytical, and other support in the realization of Presidential powers as stipulated by the Constitution of Ukraine

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 101

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

Constitutional Commission • Advisory body for the President High: Chairman – Volodymyr Groysman of Ukraine (Advisory body for the • Was created by the President of • The Constitution Commission will: (1) Address: 11, Bankova St., Kyiv, 01220, President of Ukraine) Ukraine on March 3, 2015 analyze the implementation of the Tel.: +03 (044) 255 7333, • Consists of 64 members, Constitution and existing gaps; (2) http://constitution.gov.ua/ including members of the develop proposals and Parliament, academics, judges, recommendations regarding needed prosecutors, and lawyers amendments; (3) ensure the widest • Established to develop the possible public discussion of the proposal on the Constitutional proposals; and (4) develop a draft law reform, ensure the wide public with amendments to the Constitution. and expert discussion on the proposals, and develop the draft laws on amending the Constitution of Ukraine.

Judicial Reform Council • Advisory body for the President High: Coordinator – Oleksii Filatov of Ukraine (Advisory body for the • Was created by the President of • The Council is tasked with: (1) Address: 11, Bankova St., Kyiv, 01220, President of Ukraine) Ukraine on October 24, 2014 developing recommendations to the Tel.: +03 (044) 255 7333, • Consists of 42 members, President regarding the strategy of the http://jrc.org.ua/ including members of the judiciary reform; (2) coordinating Parliament, academics, judges, reform efforts of the government of prosecutors, lawyers and Ukraine, civil society and international representatives of the institutions; (3) developing the draft international donors’ amendments to the laws in the community. identified areas; (4) monitoring the • Established to address the implementation of the strategy of reform of the judiciary and judicial reform; and (5) communicating other related areas judicial reform issues to the public and international community.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 102

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

High Council of Justice (HCJ) • The HCJ is a collective, High: Chairman – Igor Benedysyuk, Judge of the High independent constitutional body Economical Court of Ukraine (Judicial governance body) of state power and judicial • One of the most important New governance operating on a Justice’s counterparts Address: 12A Studentska Str., Kyiv, 04050, permanent basis in Ukraine. • As part of cooperation with the HCJ, Tel.: +38 (044) 481 0620, • The HCJ’s activity is focused on New Justice contributes to the http://www.vru.gov.ua/en/ ensuring the judicial development, discussion and independence, functioning of the introduction of constitutional, legislative judiciary on principles of and regulatory changes with the view of responsibility and accountability strengthening judicial independence in to society, establishing of an compliance with the international integrity-based and highly standards. professional judicial corps, as • The Program also provides support to well as observance of the improve the HCJ’s disciplinary practice Constitution and laws of with due consideration of and bringing Ukraine, including professional in line with the international expertise ethics in the activities of judges and best practice. and prosecutors.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 103

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

High Qualifications • The body operating on a High: Chairman – Serhii Koziakov Commission of Judges of permanent basis in the judiciary. Ukraine (HQC) The HQC’s main functions are • One of the most important New Address: 9, Mekhanizatoriv Str., Kyiv, 03110, (1) judicial selection and Justice’s partners. Ukraine (Judicial governance body) recommending for appointment • Cooperation between New Justice and Tel.: +38 (044) 233-6702 and (2) judicial qualifications the HQC aimed at improving judicial http://vkksu.gov.ua/en/ evaluation selection and qualification evaluation. • The HQC composed of sixteen members: 1) eight judges appointed by the Congress of Judges of Ukraine; 2) two persons appointed by the Congress of representatives of higher law schools and scientific institutions; 3) two persons appointed by the Congress of Lawyers; 4) two persons appointed by the Ombudsman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine; 5) two persons appointed by the Head of State Judicial Administration

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 104

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

Public Integrity Council (PIC) • The PIC was established to High: Coordinators – Vitalii Tytych and Halyna Chyzhyk assist the HQC in determining the conformity of judges • New Justice provides expertise and Address: 9, Mekhanizatoriv Str., Kyiv, 03110, (candidates for judgeship) with technical support to the Public Integrity Ukraine the professional ethics and Council targeted at the Council’s Tel.: +38 (044) 233-6702 integrity criteria in the light of institutional building, the https://grd.gov.ua/ qualifications assessment. implementation of transparent and

effective operational procedures, and • The PIC provides information to the HQC regarding judges building efficient cooperation with the (candidates for judgeship) and, if HQC. there are appropriate grounds, the opinion on non-conformity of a judge (a candidate for judgeship) with the professional ethics and integrity criteria, which is attached to the candidate’s dossier or the judicial dossier. • The PIC’s composition includes representatives of human rights communities, academic lawyers, advocates and journalists who are recognized and highly reputable professionals in their area of activities and meet the political neutrality and integrity criteria.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 105

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

National School of Judges of • The NSJ is a state body with High: Rector – Mykola Onishchuk Ukraine (NSJ) special status in judicial system Vice-rector – Nataliya Shuklina of Ukraine, which provides • One of the most important New (Body within the judiciary) courts with qualified judicial and Justice’s counterparts in the area of Official address: 16-D Lypska St., Kyiv, 01601, court staff, conduct trainings, training of judicial candidates and Address for correspondence: а/с №30, Kyiv, 03110, scientific and research activity in ongoing training of judges and court Location: 120A Zhylyanska Str., Kyiv, 03110, field of judiciary staff Tel: +38 (044) 353 8340, • The NSJ is established by the E-mail: [email protected], decision of the HQC 21.12.2010 www.nsj.gov.ua № 822\p.4-3

State Judicial Administration • The state agency responsible for High: Head - Zynovii Holodniuk of Ukraine (SJA) administrative, logistic, financial and other support to the • Main distributor of funding to courts Address: 18/5 Lypska St, Kyiv, Ukraine, (Body within the judiciary) judiciary • Main performer of all statistical, IT and Tel/fax: +38 (044) 277 7600 other administrative work • Developer and implementer of all related policies • Has huge influence on courts despite its service status

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 106

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

Supreme Court of Ukraine • The highest judicial body in the High: Chief Justice – Justice Yaroslav Romahiuk (SCU) system of courts of general jurisdiction. • The Supreme Court of Ukraine is the Address: 4A, P.Orlyka St., Kyiv, (Judicial body) • The authority of the Supreme highest judicial body in Ukraine Tel.: +38 (044) 253 0287, Court includes, in particular, the http://www.scourt.gov.ua/ administration of justice in line with the procedural law, the analysis of judicial statistics, the generalization of judicial practice, as well as the provision of opinions on draft bills relating to the judicial system, justice administration, status of judges, enforcement of judgements and other issues concerning the functioning of the Ukrainian judiciary.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 107

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

High Administrative Court of • Administrative courts adjudicate Medium: Acting Chief Judge – Mykhailo Smokovych, Ukraine (HAC) all cases on the disputes of individuals or legal entities with • The HAC is the third element of a Address: 8 Moskovska St., building 5, 01029 Kyiv, (Judicial body) the authorities regarding appeal system of administrative courts and is Tel: + 38 (044) 501 9525, against their decisions, acts or designed to safeguard the right to E-mail: [email protected], omissions; cases on public appeal in cassation against decisions www.vasu.gov.ua services, execution of powers by delivered by appellate administrative the authorities and disputes on courts legal relations connected with election process and referendum • The HAC considers administrative cases in cassation in compliance with procedural law; analyzes court statistics; examines and generalizes case law; provides assistance to lower courts with the aim of unified application of norms of the Constitution and laws of Ukraine in case; and provides lower courts with advisory clarifications regarding application of law • In events prescribed by procedural law the HAC acts as a court of appeal

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 108

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

High Civil and Criminal Court • The HCCC considers civil and Medium: Chief Judge – Borys Hulko of Ukraine (HCCC) criminal cases in cassation in compliance with procedural law; • The HCCC is the third element of a Address: 4a Pylypa Orlyka St., Kyiv 01043, (Judicial body) analyzes court statistics; relevant system of specialized courts Tel./Fax: +38 (044) 363 4150, examines and generalizes case and is designed to safeguard the right to Email: [email protected], law; provides assistance to appeal in cassation against decisions http://sc.gov.ua/ lower courts with the aim of delivered by appellate courts unified application of norms of the Constitution and laws of Ukraine in case; and provides lower courts with advisory clarifications regarding application of law

High Commercial Court of • The HCC considers commercial Medium: Chief Justice - Bohdan Lvov, Ukraine (HCC) cases in cassation in compliance Deputy Chief Justice - Hennadii Kravchuk with procedural law; analyzes • The HCC is the third element of a (Judicial body) court statistics; examines and relevant system of commercial courts Address: 6, Kopylenka St., Kyiv 01016, generalizes case law; provides and is designed to safeguard the right to Tel.: +38 (044) 536 1801, assistance to lower courts with appeal in cassation against decisions E-mail: [email protected] the aim of unified application of delivered by appellate courts http://www.arbitr.gov.ua/ norms of the Constitution and laws of Ukraine in case; and provides lower courts with advisory clarifications regarding application of law

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 109

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

Local and appellate courts of Courts of the first and second Medium: all jurisdictions instances within judicial system of Ukraine • This cooperation gives possibility to work not only at top, but also at grass roots level in practical implementation of all activities

Council of Judges of Ukraine • The highest judicial self- High: Chair – Justice Valentyna Simonenko (COJ) governance body during the period between the Congresses • Determines the policy of judicial self- (Judicial self-governance body) of Judges, developing and governance Address: 18/5 Lypska St., Kyiv, 01601, Tel.: + 38 providing for the • Is responsible for implementing the (044) 277 7629, implementation measures to Code of Judicial Ethics and the http://www.court.gov.ua/eng/ ensure judicial independence and Communications Strategy for the considering issues related to Judiciary developed in cooperation with legal and social protection of New Justice. judges • Plays an important role in piloting court • Performs control over the performance evaluation standards organization of courts activities and submits suggestions with respect to court operation matters to the state authorities and local self-governance bodies, executes other powers stipulated by law and included in the COJ terms of reference • The primary New Justice’s counterpart is the COJ Expert Group on the Code of Ethics

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 110

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

Ministry of Justice of Ukraine • The principal body within the High: Minister of Justice – Pavlo Petrenko (MOJ) central executive system Deputy Minister of Justice – Gia Getsadze responsible for implementation • Partnership and cooperation with MOJ (Governmental body) of the state legal policy and will contribute to improving Address: 13 Horodetskogo St., Kyiv 01001, coordinated by the Cabinet of administrative services, forming of an Tel.: +38 (044) 278-3723, Ministers of Ukraine effective free legal aid system in Ukraine [email protected], • Resolves the issues arising from and legal education reform http://minjust.gov.ua/ generally accepted provisions of the international law and international treaties of Ukraine acknowledged as binding by the Verkhovna Rada • Judicial system comprises the MOJ and its territorial bodies. The powers of the MOJ spread over notary, scientific institutions of forensic examinations, enterprises, institutions and organizations • The coordinating Center for Free Legal Aid Providing acts under the MOJ • Implements overall enforcement reform including launch of the profession of the private enforcement officer

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 111

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

Ministry of Education and • The central executive body High: Minister – Liliya Hrynevych, Science of Ukraine coordinated by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine • New Justice cooperates with the MOE Address: Prospect Peremogy, 10, 01135 Kyiv, (Governmental body) • A part of the central executive in the area of legal education reform Tel: +38 (044) 226 2661; + 38 (044) 481 4771, authority of Ukraine and the E-mail: [email protected], main body responsible for the www.mon.gov.ua central executive development and implementation of national policy in education and science (including issues of innovation and information technology, and intellectual property rights), youth, physical culture and sport

Council of Europe (COE) • Based in Strasbourg (France) High: Мårten Ehnberg – Head of the Council of Europe covers virtually the entire Office in Ukraine (Donor) European continent, with its 47 The COE can provide support in expert member countries assessment of key judicial legislation and Address: 8 Illinska Street, 7 entrance, 6th floor, • Seeks to develop throughout conducting events 04070 Kyiv, Europe common and democratic Tel: +38 (044) 425 6001, principles based on the E-mail: [email protected] European Convention on https://www.coe.int/en/web/kyiv Human Rights and other reference texts on the protection of individuals

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 112

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

Organization for Security and • The OSCE Project Coordinator High: Ambassador - Vaidotas Verba Cooperation in Europe is the second OSCE field (OSCE) Project Coordinator operation to have been • New Justice achieved cooperation with Address: 16, Striletska St., Kyiv 01030, in Ukraine established in Ukraine for the the OSCE Project Coordinator in Tel +38 (044) 492 0382, purpose of carrying out tasks Ukraine in the legislative area and legal http://www.osce.org/ukraine (Donor) related to the new form of co- education reform initiatives operation between Ukraine and the OSCE. This co-operation consists of the planning, implementation and monitoring of projects between relevant authorities of Ukraine and the OSCE and its institutions. Such projects may cover all aspects of OSCE activities (including rule of law and human rights) and may involve governmental as well as non-governmental bodies of Ukraine.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 113

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project EU-funded Project “Support • The EU-funded Project “Support High: to Justice Sector Reforms in to Justice Sector Reforms in Ukraine” Ukraine” aims at consolidation • New Justice cooperates closely with Dovydas Vitkauskas, Team Leader of EU Project of sector-wide justice reforms in the EU Project in implementing private “Support to Justice Sector Reforms in Ukraine” (Donor) Ukraine. The Project involves enforcement reform, legal education Address: 4, Rylskyi Lane, 6th floor, Kyiv, 01001, experts from various EU and judicial selection reform. Ukraine Member States and beyond, and Phone/Fax: (+380 44) 277 94 27 will continue until the end of http://www.justicereformukraine.eu/ 2017. Among other activities, the Project has assisted Ukrainian authorities in the judiciary reset and selection of new Supreme Court judges, creation of the Judicial Reform Council, restructuring of MOJ, reform of registers and e-justice, setting up of probation service, etc.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 114

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

Ukrainian Bar Association • All-Ukrainian public Medium: President - Andriy Stelmashchuk (UBA) organization, founded in 2002 to bring together lawyers for a • One of the most dynamic and active Address: 5 Mezhigirska street, office 15, Kyiv, 04071, (Professional association) strong and influential organization of lawyers in Ukraine Ukraine, professional community, which expanding activities abroad and taking a Tel.: +38 (044) 492 8848, would become a powerful voice proactive stance on many issues of legal http://www.uba.ua/eng/ of the legal profession of life in Ukraine Ukraine • New Justice cooperates with the UBA • The UBA is committed to the in the areas of the bar, free legal aid and development of the legal legal education profession, improvement of legislation, implementation of ethical standards in provision of legal services, protection of professional rights of the UBA members and human rights in general • Unites over 3,000 lawyers from all regions of the country, including attorneys, notaries, scholars, judges, civil servants, MPs and well-known scientists in the field of law; student division of the UBA consists of more than 1,500 future lawyers from more than 50 educational institutions

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 115

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

American Chamber of • One of the most active non- Medium: President - Andy Hunder Commerce in Ukraine (ACC) governmental and non-profit Address: Horizon Park Business Center, business organizations operating The ACC provides opportunity to promote 12 Amosova Street, 15 Floor, (Professional association) in Ukraine the rule of law in business community Kyiv, 03680, • Represent the internationally Tel.: +38 (044) 490 5800, orient investment community Fax: +38 (044) 490 5801, and facilitate the entrance of E-mail: [email protected], potential new investors in the http://www.chamber.ua/ market • Advocates on behalf of its members from more than 50 nations to the Ukrainian government and other governments-economic partners of Ukraine on matters of trade, commerce, and economic reform • The Anti-Corruption and Bar Legislation Working Groups established within the ACC

Yaroslav Mudryi National Law • A leading Ukrainian law school Medium: Rector – Vasyl Y. Tatsiy University • Has been actively participating in a number of New Justice • Participated and continues to participate Address: 77 Pushkinskaya Str., 61024, Kharkiv programs and events with an in a series of New Justice projects and Ukraine impact on the nation-wide legal events making an impact on the Tеl. +38 (057) 704 9293 education system modernization of the nation-wide legal E-mail: [email protected] education system Website: http://nlu.edu.ua/

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 116

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

National University "Odesa • A leading Ukrainian law school Medium: Rector – Volodymyr Zavalnyuk Law Academy" • Has been actively participating in a number of New Justice • Participated and continues to participate Address: 23 Fontanska Doroga, Odesa, 65009, programs and events with an in a series of New Justice projects and Ukraine impact on the nation-wide legal events making an impact on the Tеl. +38 (8048) 719 8801, education system modernization of the nation-wide legal E-mail: [email protected] education system Website: http://onua.edu.ua/

Taras Shevchenko Kyiv • A leading Ukrainian law school Medium: Rector – Leonid Guberskii National University, Law • Has been actively participating in Dean – Ivan Hrytsenko School a number of New Justice • Participated and continues to participate programs and events with an in a series of New Justice projects and Address: 60 Volodymyrska Str., Kyiv. 01601, Ukraine impact on the nation-wide legal events making an impact on the Tеl. +38 (044) 239 3186, education system modernization of the nation-wide legal Fax +38 (044) 239 3237, education system E-mail: [email protected] Website: https://www.law.univ.kiev.ua/ua/

Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi • A leading Ukrainian law school Medium: Rector – Stepan Melnychuk National University, Law Has been actively participating in Dean – Petro Patsurkivskyi School a number of New Justice • Participated and continues to participate programs and events with an in a series of New Justice projects and Address: 2 Kotsjubynskyi Str. impact on the nation-wide legal events making an impact on the Chernivtsi 58012, Ukraine education system modernization of the nation-wide legal Tеl. +380-372-526235, education system Fax +380-372-552914, E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.chnu.cv.ua/

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 117

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

Law School Director – Ivan Gorodyskii • A leading Ukrainian law school Medium:

• Has been actively participating in Address: 17 Sventsytskogo Str., Lviv, 79011, Ukraine Ukrainian Catholic University a number of New Justice • Participated and continues to participate Tеl. +38 (032) 240 9944, Law School programs and events with an in a series of New Justice projects and Fax +38 (032) 240-99-50, impact on the nation-wide legal events making an impact on the E-mail: [email protected] education system modernization of the nation-wide legal Website: http://law.ucu.edu.ua education system

Medium: Dean – Antonina Bobkova • A leading Ukrainian law school

• Has been actively participating in Participated and continues to participate Address: 2 Grushevskogo Str., Vinnytsya, 21050, Vasyl Stus Donetsk National a number of New Justice • in a series of New Justice projects and Ukraine University, Law School programs and events with an events making an impact on the Tеl. +380 (432) 50 8947 impact on the nation-wide legal modernization of the nation-wide legal E-mail: [email protected] education system education system Website: http://law.donnu.edu.ua/uk-ua/about-the- faculty

President – Andrii Meleshevych Dean – Denys Azarov • A leading Ukrainian law school Medium:

• Has been actively participating in National University of “Kyiv- Address: 2 Skovorody Str., Kyiv, 04070, Ukraine a number of New Justice Mohyla Academy”, Faculty of • Participated and continues to participate Tеl. +38 (044) 425 6059, programs and events with an Law Sciences in a series of New Justice projects and Fax +38 (044) 463 6783, impact on the nation-wide legal events making an impact on the E-mail: [email protected] education system modernization of the nation-wide legal Website: education system http://www.ukma.edu.ua/index.php/osvita/fakulteti/fpn

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 118

Counterpart/Beneficiary Importance to the Project/ Counterpart/Beneficiary Contact Information Description Role in the Project

• The purpose of activity of the CLC is purification of government from individuals who compromised themselves with work for the previous regime and corruption. CLC is Chair of the Board - Oleksandra Drik permanently exercising civic Medium: control over the implementation Address: 16-22 B. Khmelnytskogo Str., Building B,

of the Law "On government Room 408 / 1-3 0, Kyiv, 01030, Ukraine NGO “Civic Lustration • As New Justice’s grantee, CLC cleansing" and the Law "On Tеl. +38 (067) 719 9835, Committee” (CLC) monitors public pofficials lustration and prevention of corruption" (in E-mail: [email protected] judicial vetting progress terms of e-declaration). Website: www.lku.org.ua Activities are also related to legislation and reforms of the judiciary, civil service, law enforcement agencies, disclosure of public/budget expenditures and wealth of officials

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 119

ANNEX E. SUCCESS STORIES SNAPSHOT Advancing Court Administration Profession in Ukraine

Though Ukraine’s Law on the Judiciary and the Status of Judges gives court administrators broad authorities, they still lack comprehensive professional development opportunities. To address this challenge, since 2012, USAID has implemented the Judicial Administration Certificate Program in cooperation with Michigan State University, which supports the State Judicial Administration and National School of Judges. Overall, 120 court administrators have graduated from the Program in Ukraine to June 2016. On March 21-23, 2017, the USAID New Justice Program conducted а reunion of the Judicial Administration Certificate Program’s 2013, 2015 and 2016 graduates, giving them the unique opportunity of “Looking PHOTO: USAID New Justice Program Back and Looking Forward” to share progress and exchange experiences implementing their capstone projects and other innovations and Judicial Administration Certificate initiatives in the courts, including those from Anti-Terrorist Operation Program graduates presenting their zone on in the East of Ukraine. The reunion agenda was based on the initiatives during the reunion “Looking results of a graduates’ needs assessment conducted by Michigan State Back and Looking Forward” on March 22, University, which identified four key topics currently important for court 2017 in Kyiv. administrators in their professional development and advancing the court administration profession. This includes: (1) opportunity to learn about the projects, initiatives, and innovations implemented by other graduates; (2) advance the court administration as a recognized profession to build position status and attract highly skilled individuals; (3) clarify and achieve “Innovators fair during the reunion legal authorization related to the level of autonomy, span of authority prompted many ideas which I did not and control, and designated responsibilities of the court administrator think about.” position; and (4) develop effective and mutually respectful relationships with chief judges for the purpose of advancing public trust and — Larysa Shramko, Chief of Staff of the confidence in the courts. Boguslav Rayon Court of Kyiv Region To address these issues, during the reunion, the graduates developed implementation plans that ultimately influenced strategic initiatives on “This is one of most successful projects advancing court administration in Ukraine. The Court Management implemented in the sphere of the judicial Institute NGO, an institution that had been initiated by graduates in reform.” 2016, took leadership on further promoting these strategic initiatives. As a result of the reunion, court administrators created a social network — Mykola Onishchyk, Rector of the where they will continue sharing their experience and discussing issues National School of Judges on their routine work, while the National School of Judges expressed its intention to continue cooperating with the graduates by engaging them as faculty members, particularly for professional development of newly appointed court staff of the Supreme Court. The reunion was rewarding experience for the graduates, who now are introducing sustainable changes in court administration particularly through pursuing the strategic initiatives for the next four years developed by experienced and committed group of court administration professionals.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 120

SNAPSHOT Strengthening Civil Society and Judiciary Cooperation in Ukraine Increasing accountability of the judiciary to citizens and civil society is Council of Judges and civil society a key judicial reform focus in Ukraine. Even though interaction organization join efforts to ensure between the judiciary and the communities they serve has improved the right to a public hearing and the since the Revolution of Dignity, there is still a lack of comprehensive principle of transparency of court and sustainable cooperation between civil society and judicial institutions. trials To address this issue, on November 29, 2016, the USAID New Justice Program jointly with the Council of Judges (COJ) conducted a Judiciary and Civil Society Cooperation Forum, which provided a platform for dialogue between judiciary and civil society representatives to share lessons learned from and opportunities for civil society and judiciary cooperation. During the forum, the COJ signed the first memorandum of cooperation with a civil society organization - the CSO “Human Rights Vector” - aimed at improving citizen access to justice by providing online streaming of court proceedings that are of public interest. As a result of COJ’s and Human Rights Vector’s joint efforts, courts in the city of Kyiv as well as those in the Kyiv, Vinnytsia, Dnipro, PHOTO: CSO “Human Rights Vector” Mykolayiv, and Luhansk oblasts independently record and broadcast court hearings. As of May 2017, they broadcasted 320 court hearings in 30 trials on the official “The Judicial Power of Ukraine” YouTube channel. Also, Human Rights Vector provides commentary on court Deputy COJ’s Chair Bogdan Monich and Director of the CSO “Human Rights Vector” Valeriia trials - “Trial in Simple Words” - streamed with court equipment. Rybak signing the protocol of cooperation Also, Human Rights Vector and conducts communications training during Judiciary and Civil Society Cooperation (certified by the COJ) for court press secretaries. Forum on November 29, 2016 in Kyiv. The USAID New Justice Program will further support the Human Rights Vector’s initiative “Trial in Simple Words”, which will result in creating an effective regional network of legal commentators, including lawyers, judicial experts and civic activists from different "Judicial community can be supported only oblasts of Ukraine as a new mechanism for bridging the gap between by civil society.” community and the judiciary. — Valentyna Simonenko, Council of Judges Chair

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 121

SNAPSHOT Ensuring Fair, Merit-Based, Corruption-Free Admissions to All Ukrainian Law Schools The quality of legal education is fundamentally important for a well- Enhancing legal education quality functioning judiciary to promote rule of law and combat corruption. through mandatory, external, For years, the Government of Ukraine and over 130 Ukrainian public independent, standardized entrance and private law schools lacked quality assessment tools to prevent exam to graduate programs in law subjectivity and corruption in admissions, testing, and the conferring of degrees. In 2015-2016, the USAID FAIR Justice Project advocated for and supported the Ministry of Education and Science (MOE) to pilot an external, standardized entrance exam for master’s degree programs in law. The Ukrainian Center for Education Evaluation (UCEE) administered the exam for nine self-selected law schools across Ukraine, simultaneously testing over 1,750 candidates at 12 venues in Kyiv, Chernivtsi, Lviv, Odesa, and Poltava. In 2016-2017, the USAID New Justice Program built on the pilot project’s success and, jointly with the OSCE Project Coordinator in Ukraine, assisted the UCEE in scaling it up for all 104 Ukrainian law PHOTO: USAID New Justice Program schools offering master’s programs in law. New Justice provided Odesa-based candidates for master’s degree support in developing a mandatory, external, independent, programs in law taking MEISEE on August 3, standardized, entrance exam for master’s degree programs in law 2017. (MEISEE), in particular MEISEE’s (1) concept, (2) legal framework, (3) multiple choice exam questions. Further, New Justice helped the MOE raise target audiences and the public’s awareness about MEISEE, monitor MEISEE administration, and analyze and present its results. In August 2017, the UCEE successfully administered the MEISEE for 16,081 candidates at 75 venues throughout Ukraine. The exam “MEISEE is an effective tool for corruption consisted of three sub-tests: (1) critical, analytical, and logical thinking prevention as well as assessment of legal akin to the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) in the United States; education quality at all Ukrainian law (2) legal knowledge test, and (3) a foreign language (English, German schools.” or French) test. The UCEE automatically processed the answer sheets and announced the exam results on August 15, 2017. Nearly 80 — Liliia Hrynevych, Minister of Education percent of candidates passed the exam. and Science of Ukraine The MOE has committed to extending MEISEE to include applicants

for graduate programs in international law and ensure that state funding goes to the candidates with highest MEISEE scores, which would promote fair competition competition for both public funding and the highest performing applicants. As a result of the success of this concept, the MOE has decided to employ MEISEE in foreign languages to test all the applicants for graduate programs in the fields of humanities, social and behavioral sciences, journalism, and services.

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 122

SNAPSHOT Strengthening Ukrainian Law Schools’ Capacity to Deliver Quality Anti-Corruption Education Corruption has long been a serious obstacle to justice sector Ukrainian law schools introduce elective reforms in Ukraine. In 2016, Ukraine ranked 131st out of 176 anti-corruption courses in their formal countries in the Transparency International Corruption curricula Perceptions Index with corruption plaguing all areas of life. To address this issue, the USAID New Justice Program (New Justice) designed and implemented the International On-Line Anti- Corruption Course in the Spring Semester 2017, enabling the international anti-corruption academic cooperation among one US and four Ukrainian leading law schools The course enabled in-class and real time online practice-oriented, skills-based joint learning of 40 Ukrainian and 6 US students, focusing on the United Nations Convention (UN) against Corruption, transnational anti-bribery laws and good anticorruption practices, including corruption prevention and stolen assets recovery measures. To enhance Ukraine’s law schools capacity to deliver quality anti-

PHOTO: USAID New Justice Program corruption education, New Justice supported the participation of four Ukrainian law professors-local coordinators of the course in the UN Anti-Corruption Academic Expert Workshop in Tirana, Prof. Speedy Rice and participants of the April 13-14, Albania on November 24-25, 2016. As a result, the Ukrainian 2017 international academic anti-corruption workshop in Kyiv. Workshop participants developed professors developed a Report with Recommendation for concepts and action plans of community service Strengthening Anti-Corruption Education in Ukraine, which New projects ranging from information campaigns, moot Justice widely disseminated to promote and enhance academic anti- courts, and teaching high school students anti- corruption cooperation. corruption to developing anti-corruption chat-bots. The workshop resulted in the Resolution and New Justice then helped the Ukrainian law schools design the Action Plan for strengthening anti-corruption Syllabus of the Ukrainian Component of the International On-Line education in Ukraine. Anti-Corruption Course, focusing on developing student’s skills to analyze Ukraine’s anti-corruption legislation and domestic anti- “Our law students developed anti-corruption corruption compliance measures in light of the UN Convention competences.” against Corruption and good anti-corruption practices. - Petro Patsurkivskyi, Chernivtsi Law Based on the results of the International On-Line Anti-Corruption School Dean Course, the syllabus of its Ukrainian component, and expert recommendations, New Justice successfully advocated for all the “The course served as a valuable tool for four Ukrainian law schools to introduce elective anti-corruption enhancing international academic cooperation.” courses into their formal curricula, building in more sustainability into its anti-corruption education efforts going forward. - Mariia Taras, UCU Rule of Law Center Executive Director

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 123

ANNEX F. REPORTS AND DELIVERABLES LIST

Annex 1: Quarterly Performance Report October to December 2016

Annex 2: Quarterly Performance Report January to March 2017

Annex 3: Quarterly Performance Report April to June 2017

Annex 4: Report on IHL application in conflict-related cases (Ukr., Eng.);

Annex 5: Report on recommendations for the most appropriate term to be used for the position title with respect to paralegal servants in Ukraine (Ukr., Eng.);

Annex 6: Report on the Analysis of the Effectiveness of the Legislation on Corruption Prevention in the Justice Sector (Ukr.);

Annex 7: Report on Corruption Risks Assessment in the Judicial System of Ukraine (Eng., Ukr.);

Annex 8: Report on the Conflict of Interest in the Justice Sector of Ukraine (Eng., Ukr.);

Annex 9: Final Report on MSU Judicial Administration Certificate Program Graduate Reunion; Exploratory Needs Assessment Focus Groups for Chief Judge Education and Ministry of Justice Leadership Training Program;

Annex 10: Report on Analysis of Effectiveness of Legislation on Corruption Prevention in the Justice Sector (Ukr.);

Annex 11: Report with Recommendations on Amendment of the HCJ Rules of Procedure (Ukr.);

Annex 12: Lessons Learned and Recommendations from the New Justice Study Visit to the High Council for the Judiciary of Portugal on Judicial Self-Governance Operations (Eng.);

Annex 13: Assessment Report on the Legal Clinical Education in Ukraine with recommendations on strengthening the legal clinics (Eng.);

Annex 14: Report on the results of independent monitoring of anonymous testing on February 16, 2017 and case study on February 21, 2017 and Recommendations to the HQC (Ukr.);

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 124

Annex 15: Report on the Public Integrity Council and the results applied by the High Qualifications Commission of Judges of Ukraine (Eng., Ukr.);

Annex 16: Recommendations on improving judicial reporting and statistic for better gender disaggregated data collection (Ukr.);

Annex 17: Report on psychological testing tools’ piloting and standardization (Ukr.);

Annex 18: Report on leading women judges worldwide and in Ukraine. Best practices (Ukr.);

Annex 19: Draft gender index framework for the judiciary (Ukr.);

Annex 20: Report on access to justice for sexual and other forms of gender based violence (SGBV) victims affected by conflicts. International experience and recommendations for Ukraine (Ukr.);

Annex 21: Report on Establishing the Anti-Corruption Court in Ukraine: Key Issues to Solve and Recommendations Based on Slovak Experience (Eng., Ukr.);

Annex 22: Memorandum on Ukraine Proposals for Special Anticorruption Court (Eng.);

Annex 23: Rile of Law Checklist with Commentary and Glossary (Ukr.)

Annex 24: Report on Status and Perspectives of the Implementation of the Article 375 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Ukr.);

Annex 25: Report on the best practices for governing the legal profession, toward increased accountability and transparency and the maintenance of high professional standards, in the public interest (Eng., Ukr.);

Annex 26: Comments of the Law on the Bar and Advocates Activity (Eng., Ukr.);

Annex 27: Analysis of the Articles 106, 109 and 110 of the Law on the Judiciary and Status of Judges (Eng.);

Annex 28: Common Understanding on the Basic Principles for Establishing High Anti- Corruption Court in Ukraine (Eng., Ukr.);

Annex 29: Abridged Booklet on the Abilities Testing in the Framework of the Mandatory, Independent, Standardized, External Entrance Exam for Master’s Degree Programs in Law in 2017 (Ukr.);

Annex 30: Analytical Report on the Abilities Testing in the Framework of the Mandatory, Independent, Standardized, External Entrance Exam for Master’s Degree Programs in Law in 2017 (Ukr.);

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 125

Annex 31: Assessment Report with Recommendations for Strengthening Legal Education Quality following the Independent, External, On-site Assessment of Legal Education Quality at Odesa Law Academy School of Advocacy (Eng., Ukr.);

Annex 32: Final Resolution and Action Plan on Strengthening the Academia’s Capacity to Provide Quality Anticorruption Education and Develop Anticorruption Cooperation in Ukraine following the April 13-14 International Anticorruption Education for Law Students Workshop, Kyiv, Ukraine (Eng., Ukr.);

Annex 33: Methodology for Independent, External, On-site Assessment of Legal Education Quality in Ukraine According to the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (Eng., Ukr.);

Annex 34: Presentation on the Results of Opinion Survey of Judges and Justice Sector Personnel on Legal Education Reform in Ukraine (Eng., Ukr.);

Annex 35: Recommendations on Strengthening Experiential Legal Education following the July 5-7, 2017 Workshop on Developing Experiential Criminal Law and Procedure Courses (Ukr.);

Annex 36: Report on Analysis of the Draft Legal Education Reform Concept Paper in Light of Stakeholder Feedback Following Regional Presentations of the draft Concept Paper (Ukr.);

Annex 37: Report on Lessons Learned and Participation of the Kyiv-Mohyla Law School Team in the European Law Moot Court Competition (Eng., Ukr.);

Annex 38: Report on Lessons Learned and Participation of the Taras Shevchenko Law School Team in the European Regional Round of the Moot Court Competition on World Trade Organization Law (Eng., Ukr.);

Annex 39: Report with Recommendations on Developing Experiential Criminal Law and Procedure Courses (Ukr.);

Annex 40: Report with Recommendations on Enhancing the Capacity of Academia to Deliver High-Quality Anti-Corruption Education (Ukr.);

Annex 41: Summary of the Analysis of Abilities Testing in the Framework of the Mandatory, Independent, Standardized, External Entrance Exam for Master’s Degree Programs in Law in 2017 (Ukr.);

Annex 42: Ukrainian Component Syllabus of the International Online Anti-Corruption Course (Ukr.);

Annex43: Unabridged Booklet on the Abilities Testing in the Framework of the Mandatory, Independent, Standardized, External Entrance Exam for Master’s Degree Programs in Law in 2017 (Ukr.);

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 126

Annex 44: Report on Law School Boards of External Advisors with Recommendations for Ukrainian Law Schools (Eng.);

Annex 45: New Justice Program Year One Surveys of the Public, Judges and Justice Sector Professionals regarding Judicial Reform and Corruption. Presentation (Eng.);

Annex 46: Assessment of E-court Pilot Projects in Odesa Oblast (Eng.);

Annex 47: Protocol of Cooperation between Chemonics International Inc./ Nove Pravosuddya Justice Sector Reform Program and the High Council of Justice of Ukraine;

Annex 48: Protocol of Cooperation between Chemonics International Inc./ Nove Pravosuddya Justice Sector Reform Program and the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine;

Annex 49: Protocol of Cooperation between Chemonics International Inc./ Nove Pravosuddya Justice Sector Reform Program and the National School of Judges of Ukraine;

Annex 50: Protocol of Cooperation between Chemonics International Inc./ Nove Pravosuddya Justice Sector Reform Program and the High Qualifications Commission of Judges of Ukraine;

Annex 51: Protocol of Cooperation between Chemonics International Inc./ Nove Pravosuddya Justice Sector Reform Program and the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine

Annex 52: Protocol of Cooperation between Chemonics International Inc./ Nove Pravosuddya Justice Sector Reform Program and the Ministry of Science and Education of Ukraine;

Annex 53: Protocol of Cooperation between Chemonics International Inc./ Nove Pravosuddya Justice Sector Reform Program and the Kharkiv National Law University;

Annex 54: Protocol of Cooperation between Chemonics International Inc./ Nove Pravosuddya Justice Sector Reform Program and the Ukrainian Catholic University;

Annex 55: Protocol of Cooperation between Chemonics International Inc./ Nove Pravosuddya Justice Sector Reform Program and the Chernivtsi National University

NOVE PRAVOSUDDYA JUSTICE SECTOR REFORM PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT | 127

U.S. Agency for International Development 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20523 Tel.: (202) 712-0000 Fax: (202) 216-3524 www.usaid.gov