![\"photo_2026-04-20_16-07-22\"](\"https:\/\/yur-gazeta.com\/content\/UserImages\/News\/f28066a252527a4422c60c0724f729ba.jpg\")
<\/a>The IAC ISHR notes that monitoring can take place both in the courtroom itself and online. Reports are drawn up based on the findings of the monitoring, which highlight potential violations and systemic issues within the judicial process.<\/p>\nSince 2017, IAC ISHR experts have produced around 700 such reports based on the results of monitoring court hearings in Ukraine, Armenia, Belgium and France. Separately, the mission has also prepared third-party interventions before the European Court of Human Rights regarding respect for the right to a fair trial in Ukrainian courts<\/p>\n
Practical application: how student monitors analyse VAKS case studies<\/strong><\/p>\n In 2025, Anastasia Alekseeva, coordinator of the IAC ISHR monitoring mission, spoke to *Yuridicheskaya Gazeta* about the launch of an educational and analytical project being implemented with the support of ISHR Germany and the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). One of its key elements is the involvement in court monitoring of law students from universities who undergo special training based on OSCE\/ODIHR standards, the practice of the European Court of Human Rights and the key guarantees of the Convention, and who are not connected to the proceedings, the parties or, for example, bar associations.<\/p>\n According to Anastasia Alekseeva, this training enables young lawyers to take a broader view of the process, recognise the signs of potential violations and understand the principles of objectivity; therefore, observations must be made not intuitively, but in accordance with international criteria. An important point: the hearing attended by the students is accompanied by a professional observer from the IAC ISHR, which guarantees methodological support, the accuracy of assessments and a high standard of fact-finding.<\/p>\n \u201cFor us, monitoring is neither a criticism nor an endorsement of either side. It is a tool for building trust in the courts by documenting the actual state of compliance with the right to a fair trial. And the involvement of young lawyers makes this process an integral part of legal culture,\u201d<\/em> said Anastasia Alekseeva, coordinator of the IAC ISHR monitoring mission.<\/p>\n Case study: assessment of a preventive measure<\/strong><\/p>\n The process of analysing a court case can be illustrated by the example of a hearing before the Administrative Panel of the High Anti-Corruption Court. On 23 April 2026, a court hearing took place in case No. 991\/3335\/26 (presided over by Judges S.B. Bodnar, Chornenka D.S. and Panaid I.V.) concerning Herman Galushchenko, who is suspected of committing criminal offences under Part 2 of Article 255 and Part 3 of Article 209 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (participation in a criminal organisation, legalisation (laundering) of proceeds obtained by criminal means). The subject of the appeal proceedings was the defence\u2019s complaints against the ruling of the High Anti-Corruption Court of 14 April 2026, which extended the period of application of the preventive measure in the form of detention, with an alternative set in the form of bail in the amount of UAH 200 million.<\/p>\n A monitoring mission, comprising an observer from the IAC ISHR and law students, was invited to attend the hearing. However, dry procedural facts and standardised reports are only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the mission\u2019s work.<\/p>\n Observers from the IAC ISHR monitoring mission at the VAKS<\/strong><\/p>\n 1. Nazar Simchuk<\/strong>, a student at KNU (third-year student at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv). Has been involved in the project since November 2025.<\/p>\n 2. Danylo Tsarenko<\/strong>, a student at KNEU (third-year student at V. Hetman Kyiv National Economic University). Has been with the project for six months.<\/p>\n 3. Anna Yakovleva<\/strong>, student at KNEU (third-year student at V. Hetman Kyiv National Economic University). Has been with the project since November 2025.<\/p>\n 4. Vitalina Konofolska<\/strong>, student at KUBG (third-year student at B. Grinchenko Kyiv Metropolitan University). Joined the project at the end of November 2025.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Training of observers: theory and practice<\/strong><\/p>\n \u2014 What training did you undergo before you started monitoring? Is it sufficient to enable you to analyse court hearings effectively?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n Nazar Simchuk<\/strong>: We have completed basic training on international human rights standards (the UN Declaration, the provisions of the European Convention, and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights), and we have also studied monitoring methodology. This is a necessary foundation, but it is not enough for a full assessment of a single theory \u2014 it must be combined with the practice of direct observation.<\/p>\n Vitalina Konofolska<\/strong>: The training provides an understanding of rules of conduct, report writing and identifying violations. However, for a truly high-quality assessment, it is necessary to regularly attend court hearings and develop a keen eye.<\/p>\n Anna Yakovleva<\/strong>: The training provided by IAC ISHR gave clear guidelines for our work; overall, I consider it sufficient. Danylo Tsarenko: The basic knowledge provided at the outset is quite sufficient.<\/p>\n Nazar Simchuk<\/strong>: It is the combination of these skills that works best. Legal knowledge enables one to assess compliance with fair trial standards; ethical skills ensure impartiality and confidentiality; and communication skills help in interacting with court staff.<\/p>\n Anna Yakovleva<\/strong>: Legal knowledge enables one to understand the stages of court proceedings. Ethical skills teach you to maintain decorum and propriety. And communication skills are important for clearly articulating your observations and interacting with other monitors.<\/p>\n Vitalina Konofolska<\/strong>: In addition to legal and ethical skills, the ability to observe and pay attention to detail is critically important.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u2014 How do you usually prepare for a court hearing, and how do you record everything during the monitoring?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n Anna Yakovleva<\/strong>: I familiarise myself with the case details in advance and check the schedule to understand the context. During the hearing, I take structured notes or fill in standardised checklists. Afterwards, I compile the data into a report.<\/p>\n Vitalina Konofolskaya<\/strong>: I consult the VAKS portal and other open sources. In court, I usually take notes on my phone or on paper, and later transfer everything to an electronic report.<\/p>\n Danylo Tsarenko: I identify the essence of the case in advance. During the hearing, I use a voice recorder, and I draft the report in Word.<\/p>\n Nazar Simchuk<\/strong>: I obtain the main information from public registers, and I take notes directly in court.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Working in the courtroom: challenges and nuances<\/strong><\/p>\n \u2014 How is access to the meeting organised for public monitors? Are there ever any issues with accreditation?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n Vitalina Konofolska<\/strong>: There are no issues with accreditation; we enter as members of the public. We tell security where we\u2019re going and show our ID.<\/p>\n Nazar Simchuk<\/strong>: Participants and members of the public are welcomed without any problems. But there is a drawback: if a session is cancelled or postponed, there is often no prior notice.<\/p>\n Anna Yakovleva<\/strong>: We go through the standard security check for prohibited items, present our documents \u2014 and that\u2019s it.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u2014 How do the judges react to your presence?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n Nazar Simchuk<\/strong>: For the most part, they don\u2019t react at all. This suggests that the monitors are seen as part of the normal practice of open justice.<\/p>\n Vitalina Konofolska<\/strong>: We\u2019re there as members of the public, so there\u2019s usually no reaction. Occasionally, a judge might ask, purely out of curiosity, which organisation we represent.<\/p>\n Danylo Tsarenko\/Anna Yakovleva<\/strong>: The reaction is completely calm and neutral.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u2014 What are the main challenges you face?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n Anna Yakovleva<\/strong>: The main difficulties are delays or rescheduling of meetings. It can also be difficult to stay focused during lengthy hearings. I take force majeure in my stride: I simply note any deviations from the planned schedule.<\/p>\n Nazar Simchuk<\/strong>: The main challenge is the lack of advance notice regarding changes to the schedule, which makes time management difficult. If the hearing schedule is disrupted, I see it as part of the court\u2019s internal organisation \u2014 I simply adjust my observations.<\/p>\n Danylo Tsarenko\/Vitalina Konofolska<\/strong>: The problem is mainly organisational (delays in starting). In such cases, we simply wait calmly.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u2014 How do you manage to remain impartial when observing court proceedings?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n Nazar Simchuk<\/strong>: By adhering to a standardised methodology. Monitoring does not involve taking any particular stance \u2014 it is a neutral description of objective facts.<\/p>\n Anna Yakovleva:<\/strong> I avoid making my own assumptions or emotional judgements. I record only what I directly observe.<\/p>\n Vitalina Konofolska<\/strong>: I record everything without exception, treat all parties equally, and do not draw my own conclusions regarding their statements.<\/p>\n Danylo Tsarenko<\/strong>: I avoid emotionally charged language and ensure I cover the arguments of all sides.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u2014 Do you discuss complex cases amongst yourselves? How is collaboration and support generally organised within the team of monitors?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n Nazar Simchuk<\/strong>: Of course, we regularly share our experiences and agree on approaches to documentation. In complex cases, we develop a unified position for the reports. The training system itself is effective, but the results depend on the student\u2019s motivation.<\/p>\n Vitalina Konofolska<\/strong>: Post-trial discussions are an essential part of the process. We share our thoughts and clarify any unclear points. Feedback and the opportunity to receive recommendations on how to improve the report are perhaps the most effective elements of the entire monitoring process.<\/p>\n Anna Yakovleva<\/strong>: The support is top-notch; the system provides clear guidelines and proper guidance.<\/p>\n Danylo Tsarenko<\/strong>: We constantly exchange experiences. We receive advice from one another and from the coordinators.<\/p>\n \u2014 How do you assess the impact of such reports on the openness and transparency of court proceedings? And what, in your opinion, could be improved in the work of the monitors?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n Nazar Simchuk<\/strong>: Reports certainly enhance transparency and public trust in the system, as they demonstrate the courts\u2019 openness to public scrutiny. And to make our work more visible, we should expand our cooperation with the authorities \u2014 not just documenting violations, but also working together to find ways to address them.<\/p>\n Anna Yakovleva<\/strong>: There is an impact, because the reports reflect actual practice. The effectiveness of our work would increase through regular public summaries of our findings and better communication with the courts and the public.<\/p>\n Vitalina Konofolska<\/strong>: Our reports allow anyone to assess compliance with procedural rules in specific cases. Regarding improvements: we should set aside specific time for regular team meetings, as well as strengthen the project\u2019s media outreach.<\/p>\n Danylo Tsarenko<\/strong>: In my opinion, the impact is local, as the reports are mainly used to compile statistics on violations. The mission\u2019s work itself already fully fulfils its function of monitoring compliance with the Convention on Human Rights.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Conclusions of the IAC ISHR Monitoring Mission<\/strong><\/p>\n Following an analysis of the hearing held by the High Anti-Corruption Court on 23 April 2026 in Case No. 991\/3335\/26, experts from the IAC ISHR monitoring mission highlighted two points of particular significance in relation to Article 5 of the ECHR\u2014the right to liberty and security of person.<\/p>\n The first concerns risk assessment. The prosecutor\u2019s argument that the execution of international requests may take up to three years requires particular scrutiny. In the absence of specific data on the suspect\u2019s conduct, such arguments may become a general justification for detention without a genuine reassessment of the risks by the court.<\/p>\n The second point concerns the feasibility of alternatives. A bail of 200 million hryvnias significantly exceeds the limits set out in the Code of Criminal Procedure. If a person is objectively unable to avail themselves of such an alternative, the preventive measure effectively loses its alternative nature. This raises questions about the proportionality of the interference with the right to liberty.<\/p>\n The full report of the monitoring mission can be found here<\/a>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n<\/a>An analysis of over a hundred cases within a single jurisdiction provides an accurate statistical snapshot of judicial practice.<\/p>\n<\/a>So what does being a court observer actually entail in practice, and what goes unreported in official documents? We asked the observers themselves in a quick-fire Q&A.<\/p>\n<\/a>\u2014 What knowledge and skills have proved most useful in your work?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/a>Workplace rules and teamwork<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n