A recent survey of 100 CEOs of the largest Ukrainian investors by the American Chamber of Commerce revealed they don’t trust Ukrainian courts. Ukraine's shaky judicial system remains, arguably, the country's largest impediment to investments. We explore what needs to be done for businesses to have good arbitration in Ukraine, and compare this to how the problem is resolved in Western Europe.
Сourts (56%), law enforcement agencies (32%), oligarchs (28%), and tax authorities (28%) create the biggest obstacles for business, according to the chamber’s research.
The possibility of a new lockdown (61%), geopolitical uncertainty (53%), and the escalation of conflict with Russia (39%) were identified by business representatives as the top three major concerns, with regard to doing business over the next six months.
How Swedish manufacturer faced Ukraine’s judiciary

Launched in Summer 2021, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's judicial reform has been stuck in the initial stage of implementation. In particular, old guard judiciary representatives have blocked the formation of the Ethics Council which is key http://euromaidanpress.com/ to reforming the High Council of Justice — the highest judiciary executive body and the core group responsible for forming the judicial corps in Ukraine.
Meanwhile, on 8 October the Supreme Court supported the old guard High Council of Justice requesting the Constitutional Court to check whether some provisions of the judicial reform correspond to the Constitution. This step puts at risk the reform which has only been launched.
- guarantee a fair, equal, predictable, and transparent tax policy as well as fair competition (52%);
- ensure macroeconomic stability and continue cooperation with the IMF (26%);
- ensure predictability of the regulatory environment for investors (23%); and
- secure investment and property rights (21%).
What can be done for making businesses trust Ukrainian courts
Analyzing how justice for business works in Western Europe, Taras Shepel, co-founder and member of the board of the DEJURE Foundation, summarizes that in Western Europe business disputes are mainly resolved by the business community itself, through self-governing arbitration institutions. A smaller number of disputes is resolved by state courts. In particular, the expert describes how in Western Europe, national entrepreneurs form courts to protect economic interests. In France, specialized commercial courts exist within the original jurisdiction of wrongdoing. Judges here are appointed for four-year terms by entrepreneurial groups that include judges of the commercial courts. In Germany, Austria, Belgium, and the Netherlands there is the possibility of resolving commercial and even civil disputes by a blended court, which, in addition to the state judge, includes jurors elected by entrepreneurs. This allows for the creation of a court of experts and prevents the risk of corruption. Shepel notes that modern Ukraine appeared out of the totalitarian Soviet Empire. “After gaining independence, our state, unfortunately, went into the negatives, because it started to adapt socialist instruments, including the courts, to capitalist realities. They immediately shifted their subordination to party functionaries for a subordination to newborn businessmen-politicians.” Shepel concludes that courts remain an instrument of domination of the rich over the poor. DEJURE’s research analyzes the activities of commercial judges in Germany, and assesses the prospects of the restoration of activities of commercial judges in Ukraine, using the German experience. Their research traces how the current system of commercial courts in Ukraine is based on the system of state arbitration of the former USSR, which does not fully correspond to the needs of contemporary business, and is another reason why trust in the courts is extremely low. Further, the report outlines how major distrust also lies in the lack of accountability; for example, the fact that the court resolves business disputes without the business community itself. The business community, as well as ordinary citizens, do not trust judges appointed under the current procedure. The influence of entrepreneurs on the career of judges is no different from that of ordinary citizens -- solely indirect, exercised through the process of parliamentary and presidential elections. Only those who are elected implement policy regarding the judiciary delegating their members to the bodies of judicial governance -- the High Qualifications Commission of Judges and the High Council of Justice. However, these two bodies are the very ones that need reform because they have been proven to be corrupt.- Read also: How Ukraine can tame its “judicial mafia”
- Commercial courts are quite a compact system that is easier to change;
- Commercial courts are a priority for the protection and development of business; and
- Resolution of commercial disputes requires much less funding and is possible to attract from the business community itself.
Read more:
- Council of Judges blocks long-awaited judicial reform, Zelenskyy calls an urgent meeting
- Reforming judiciary in focus of Ukraine’s first high-level non-oligarchic international conference
- Saving Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Court: international experts filter candidates, facing roadblocks from old system
- How Ukraine can tame its “judicial mafia”
- Zelenskyy dismisses two Constitutional Court judges, deepening constitutional crisis
- Why post-Euromaidan anti-corruption reform in Ukraine is still a success
- Despite second attempt at judicial reform, political decisions rule Ukrainian courts