“Why reform of enforcement of punishments in Ukraine was at a crossroads”, – WRITE: epravda.com.ua
In 2025, we celebrated the 10th anniversary of the beginning of the reform aimed at improving the enforcement of court decisions. Submitted to the Verkhovna Rada in 2015, the draft laws on enforcement proceedings and the bodies and persons that enforce court decisions and decisions of other bodies “became the basis for launching a mixed model, which provided for parallel work of state and private executors. And in two years, in 2017, the first private performers began their activity. It was a period of high hopes that it would become an effective tool in ensuring fair justice. Indeed, at the beginning, the effect was impressive. By abandoning the monopoly and giving private executors the right to execute court decisions, which previously belonged exclusively to the state body, the country not only lost nothing, but on the contrary – in the short term the level of enforcement increased tenfold by many criteria. All the fears and risks that we were terrified by the opponents of modernization, or did not come true at all, or were simply scanty against the background of achievements. However, today we are forced to admit that the reform that has begun so clearly has not reached its key goals. Advertising: war as a catalyst for changes in full -scale Russian aggression has exposed weaknesses in many areas of public administration, including a system of enforcement of court decisions. Over the last three years, Ukraine has accumulated not only financial debts, but also moral to its citizens – hundreds of thousands of court decisions remain unfulfilled. Causes – imperfection of jurisprudence, which is more directed to the defense of the debtor than to restore the violated right of the collector; the legal framework, the rules of which contradict the basic law or narrow its provisions; lack of automation of enforcement proceedings; The state’s unwillingness to pay debts and low efficiency of decisions. This significantly weakens the country’s economic stability and undermines the confidence of citizens and business in the state. Execution of court decisions is the basis of legal stability, as well as a key factor for attracting investments. Advertising: however, no businessman will risk investing in a country where the creditor’s rights are not protected, and the real refund by court decision is only 10%. In other words, only 10 cents can get from each dollar. Our state needs to prove their and Western investors their ability to fulfill their obligations. It may even seem that the Ministry of Justice in particular takes some steps in this direction. So, on November 20, 2024, the Verkhovna Rada approved in the first reading of the Law No. 9363, which amends the legislation in order to digitalize the enforcement proceedings. The Ministry of Justice has presented a document almost as a “digital revolution” and an important stage of reform in the field of decisions. And part of the problems it really solves – improves mechanisms for seizing property, facilitating registration of encumbrances and automating individual procedures. However, most problems remain unresolved. For example, the bill obliges banks to connect to the system of automated arrest of funds, but does not set them clear deadlines or sanctions for non -compliance. This creates the conditions for delaying and sabotage from financial institutions, which negates the potential efficiency of the norm. Such half solutions, as well as numerous problems related to digitalization, jurisprudence, contradiction between the adopted by -laws – a consequence of the lack of strategic vision. It looks like an attempt to improve the car, not understanding what you plan to use it for: bring children to school, participate in a rally or transport cargo. In each of these cases, different equipment is required. It seems that the authorities have not yet determined strategic priorities and the final model of development: whether we stop on a mixed system where state and private executors have equal rights and responsibilities, or we strive for a fully private model, or we decide to return to the state Monopolies on the enforcement of court decisions. Without this fundamental choice, all efforts to improve the system will be similar to patching holes, not strategic development. What we are seeing now. Let’s take such a simple example: private performers do not have access to the safe city that allows you to track the vehicles of debtors. Because of this, we are forced to literally bypass information, spending more time and resources, which reduces the effectiveness of court decisions. Do such bureaucratic barriers help the state? Doubtful. Does corruption promote? The question is rhetorical. If the profile management clearly determined that we are moving to a fully mixed system where private and government executors have equal powers, it would seek to ensure the effective work of both institutions and gave them the same access to resources. What to do? As you know, awareness of the problem is the first and most important step towards solving it, because it opens the way to finding effective solutions. Ukraine should move to the private model, but should take place when we will have a fully mixed model of execution. And all this time to take systematic steps to a completely private. What should these steps be? 1. Giving private executors the right to execute decisions in favor of the state. In the face of war and a critical shortage of finance for social needs and defense, the government is looking for ways to fill the budget – in particular, raises taxes, creating an additional burden on a business that is barely breathing. At the same time, hundreds of millions of hryvnias are spent every year from the budget for the maintenance of the unprofitable state executive service. Although most of their functions could be transferred to private performers by equalizing the powers with the state. It would be a logical and economically sound decision to give private executors the right to charge penalties in favor of the state. This would allow you to effectively fill the budget during the war without additional expenditures from the state. Moreover, private performers show ten times the efficiency, which is confirmed by both Ukrainian and international research. At the same time, private contractors independently finance their activities: they keep offs, pay taxes, create jobs and pay wages to employees. In addition, this would solve another urgent problem. Over the past three years, the number of private performers has decreased, which is the threat of the institution. Reasons? One of the main ones was less work. Businesses are closed due to the direct consequences of the war: the destruction of infrastructure, the reduction of the domestic market, the decline of the purchasing power of the population – in particular credit goods and the reluctance of the banking system in the conditions of war to finance loans. Among the business that continue to work, much is focused on survival, not development. This leads to a decrease in the amount of loans Eighting and investment, and therefore there are fewer court decisions on debt collections that private executors could perform. The debtor’s profile has also changed – now, if it comes to compulsory penalties, it usually means that the debtor has such serious financial problems that it is almost nothing to recover. In addition, the moratorium on debt collection in certain categories of cases introduced during the war also significantly limit the amount of work. The transfer of the right to the right to charge penalties and other penalties in favor of the state could partially solve this problem, increasing the number of executive documents and thus providing a stable basic income. 2. Development and implementation of a comprehensive digital strategy to combat corruption will always be futile while there are conditions for its occurrence. First of all, it is necessary to eliminate the opportunities for abuse, minimizing the possibility of human interference in the process of enforcement of court decisions. If the enforcement proceedings are opened, everything should be automatically done: seizure of property, lock of the debtor’s accounts without options for deviation Secondly, private executors should access all registers, as colleagues from the civil service. for work. For example, there are several registers of vehicles in Ukraine; Invisible to the executors. This also complicates the corporate rights of debtors in LLC. Such gaps create additional difficulties in the process of execution of court decisions and reduce its effectiveness. 3. The reorientation of the jurisprudence from the “defense of the debtor” to the “protection of the creditor” in court practice, the law should equally protect all participants in the process: the debtor, the creditor and the executor. But the reality is that the judicial system often becomes a tool for manipulation by debtors. It seems that any complaint, even unfounded, is subject to satisfaction. Debtors actively use this, delaying the implementation of decisions for years. Here is an example from your own practice. The man took the debt back in 2007, and as of 2025 he has not yet been repaid. Every time the real prospect of partial repayment appeared, the debtor filed another complaint with unjustified claims, the court satisfied it, and the execution was blocked. As a result, 18 years have passed, but the creditor still remains with nothing, and the debt is unpaid. If we go to the Ministry of Justice’s website, we will see that one of their tasks is to form a policy in the field of enforcement. But the case -law, which is part of this process, does not actually contribute to the implementation of decisions. On the contrary, the courts systematically stand on the side of the debtor, who deliberately avoids the fulfillment of their obligations, satisfying even unfounded complaints. It would be good if the Ministry of Justice, together with the Supreme Court and the whole judicial branch, realized the scale of this problem and in the coming year began to look for a way that would ensure the execution of decisions that the courts themselves were made. She needs a victory in asserting the right. The reform of compulsory implementation of decisions is not just a technical reform. This is part of the general struggle for the country’s future. It is no longer possible to delay – the reform in my opinion has been lagging behind for five years with the implementation of the necessary changes. And here the effective steps should be taken not only by private performers who have long raised the issue, but also all involved stakeholders, both internal and external. Small and medium -sized businesses, which are the main consumer of private performers, could increase the pressure on deputies, demanding a transparent and effective system of implementation. Unfortunately, large businesses, with more resources to influence politicians, still demonstrates indifference, because it is often a debtor and is too interested in strengthening responsibility. Representatives of a banking system suffering from default of debt should also be involved in lobbying reform. The Ukrainian government, led by President Vladimir Zelensky, declares the desire to join the European Union. And compliance with international justice standards, including the scope of court decisions, is one of the key conditions for such integration. Therefore, the requirements of international organizations and European partners of Ukraine to improve the investment climate and increase responsibility for non -compliance with court decisions could also be a significant lever in supporting the reform. A clear, transparent and consistent reform of enforcement can be a signal for the world: the country is ready for change, capable of protecting the rights of its citizens and integrating into the European legal community. Will it become so?