ECHR Admits for Consideration the Case Kasminin v. Ukraine, Submitted by LESHCHENKO & PARTNERS - Leshchenko & Partners

Notable Case

ECHR Admits for Consideration the Case Kasminin v. Ukraine, Submitted by LESHCHENKO & PARTNERS

ECHR Admits for Consideration the Case Kasminin v. Ukraine, Submitted by LESHCHENKO & PARTNERS
ECHR Admits for Consideration the Case Kasminin v. Ukraine, Submitted by LESHCHENKO & PARTNERS

On 13 August 2025, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg admitted for consideration the case Kasminin v. Ukraine, officially notifying the defense team. The interests of former Judge of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, Oleksandr Kasminin — Honored Lawyer of Ukraine, PhD in Law — are represented in this case by the team of LESHCHENKO & PARTNERS.

This case concerns violations of the rights of a former Constitutional Court judge, the state’s long-term disregard for his judicial status, and the breach of judicial guarantees — in particular, the right to administer justice and the right to lifetime judicial remuneration upon retirement, as an essential safeguard of judicial independence and impartiality.

Legal Background

On 27 March 2021, the President of Ukraine issued a decree annulling the 2013 decree that had appointed Oleksandr Kasminin as Judge of the Constitutional Court. As a result, the Client — who by that time had served for over eight years — was prevented from performing his judicial functions, denied the possibility to administer justice, and effectively dismissed without lawful grounds.

Challenging these actions, the Client turned to the Supreme Court, where he was represented by lawyers of LESHCHENKO & PARTNERS. Following lengthy proceedings, the defense team succeeded in proving the unlawfulness of the presidential decree: on 27 October 2022, the Administrative Cassation Court within the Supreme Court declared the decree unlawful and annulled it. On 19 October 2023, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court upheld this decision.

Nevertheless, despite favorable rulings at the national level, Ukrainian state authorities continued to disregard the Client’s judicial status, refused to grant him lifetime judicial remuneration, and effectively engaged in political persecution. This ultimately formed the basis for the application to the ECHR.

Position Before the ECHR

In Strasbourg, our team consistently argues that the state has committed a series of violations under the European Convention on Human Rights:

  • Violation of Article 8 (Right to respect for private and family life).
    The prolonged denial of judicial guarantees, the refusal to recognize the Client’s status as a Constitutional Court judge, and the failure to grant him lifetime judicial remuneration had serious adverse consequences and a significant impact on his private life. The interference was unlawful, lacked a legitimate aim, and was disproportionate.

  • Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (Right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions).
    The refusal to grant the lifetime judicial remuneration guaranteed by law, followed by delays in its payment, was not “in accordance with the law,” was disproportionate, and constituted a breach of the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions. This right is an integral component of judicial status and a safeguard of independence and impartiality.

  • Violation of Article 6 § 1 (Right to a fair trial).
    Domestic courts failed to meet the standards of impartiality (objective test), equality of arms, and adversarial proceedings, as they ruled in favor of the Pension Fund of Ukraine and ignored relevant and important arguments of the defense. Moreover, the proceedings did not comply with the requirement of reasonableness in terms of length.

  • Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 (Prohibition of discrimination).
    The state’s conduct demonstrates discriminatory treatment in granting lifetime judicial remuneration. The Applicant, whose term had expired, was treated differently compared to other Constitutional Court judges who retired on different grounds.

We emphasize that these violations are systemic in nature and go beyond an individual case. They touch upon fundamental guarantees of judicial independence and impartiality in Ukraine, and respect for the legal status of judges as a cornerstone of the rule of law.

Representation

The case before the ECHR is handled by Oleksandr Leshchenko, Managing Partner of LESHCHENKO & PARTNERS, and Andrii Leshchenko, Partner and Head of the firm’s Odesa office.

Legal implications of the case

The admission of the application by the ECHR is a crucial signal for the entire legal system of Ukraine: the status of a judge and the guarantees attached to it cannot be ignored or called into question.

This is not only about individual protection, but also about shaping new case law that may influence the future of the Ukrainian judiciary and ensure real guarantees of judicial independence and impartiality.

Although a complex and lengthy process still lies ahead, an essential first step has already been taken towards changing judicial practice across Ukraine. This is a clear signal that the status of a judge and the guarantees inseparable from it are a cornerstone of judicial impartiality and the protection of the judiciary in Ukraine.