Successful Case
The Supreme Court declares Presidential Decree on the dismissal of former CCU Chair Oleksandr Tupytskyi unlawful
On 2 October 2025, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court upheld the ruling of the Administrative Cassation Court within the Supreme Court, which recognized as unlawful and annulled Presidential Decree No. 79/2021 dated 26 February 2021. This Decree temporarily suspended the Chairman and Judge of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, Oleksandr Tupytskyi, from exercising his powers.
The ruling is final and not subject to appeal. It marks the completion of a multi-year legal dispute concerning the scope of presidential powers, the independence of the Constitutional Court, and the principle of separation of powers in Ukraine.
In 2020–2021, the President of Ukraine issued a series of decrees aimed at removing Oleksandr Tupytskyi from the position of Chairman of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and annulling the decree on his appointment. These presidential acts became the subject of three separate legal proceedings, in which LESHCHENKO & PARTNERS represented Mr. Tupytskyi’s interests.
Legal Position of LESHCHENKO & PARTNERS
The legal team developed and defended a consistent legal position based on the Constitution of Ukraine and the Law of Ukraine “On the Constitutional Court of Ukraine.” In support of the claims, the following arguments were presented:
-
The Constitution of Ukraine does not grant the President the authority to temporarily suspend or revoke the appointment of a judge of the Constitutional Court;
-
The bodies responsible for the appointment of CCU judges (the President, Parliament, and the Congress of Judges) do not have the power to interfere with judicial independence or apply disciplinary or procedural measures to limit their status;
-
Such decrees undermine the principle of legal certainty, which is an essential component of the rule of law.
Case Law: Three Decisions in Three Instances
All three Presidential Decrees were declared unlawful and annulled by Ukrainian courts:
-
Presidential Decree No. 607/2020, dated 29 December 2020 (suspending Judge Tupytskyi for two months), was annulled by the Administrative Cassation Court on 13 December 2022, and this ruling was upheld by the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court on 19 October 2023 (final decision) in case No. 9901/43/21.
-
Presidential Decree No. 124/2021, dated 27 March 2021 (revoking the 2013 presidential decree appointing Tupytskyi as CCU judge), was annulled by the Administrative Cassation Court on 14 July 2021, and this decision was upheld by the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court on 19 October 2023 (final decision) in case No. 9901/96/21.
-
Presidential Decree No. 79/2021, dated 26 February 2021 (second suspension of Judge Tupytskyi), was annulled by the Administrative Cassation Court on 5 May 2025, and this ruling was upheld by the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court on 2 October 2025 (final decision) in case No. 9901/57/21.
“This ruling is the culmination of a long legal journey in defense of constitutional order and the rule of law. It reflects a principled stance that resonates across the entire legal system of Ukraine. Thanks to the professional work of LESHCHENKO & PARTNERS’ legal team, a clear litigation strategy, thorough legal analysis, and a solid evidentiary base, we were able to convincingly demonstrate the unlawfulness of all three presidential decrees. This is not only a victory for our client - it is a defense of the Constitution, the independence of constitutional jurisdiction, and the principle of separation of powers in a democratic state. We are confident that this jurisprudence will serve as a reference point for future decisions in the public law domain.”
Legal implications of the case
The decision of the Grand Chamber carries substantial importance for the Ukrainian legal system. It affirms the institutional independence of the Constitutional Court from appointing authorities (President, Parliament, and the Congress of Judges) and confirms the inviolability of constitutional guarantees.
The Court held that the presidential decrees in question were not issued “on the basis of,” “within the scope of,” or “in the manner prescribed by” the Constitution and laws of Ukraine. Accordingly, they were found to violate the rights of Oleksandr Tupytskyi as a judge of the Constitutional Court.
