Ukraine's Supreme Court Challenges Pension Cuts Before Constitutional Court

Supreme Court Petitions Constitutional Court for Review

According to ХВИЛЯ: The Plenum of Ukraine's Supreme Court has formally petitioned the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of pension restrictions imposed by the government. Lawyer Dmytro Korsun explained the legal implications of this move and the mechanism for protecting pensioners' rights through the courts. He stated that this issue arose from the need to alter the method of enforcing court rulings to compel debt recovery from the Pension Fund. This legal challenge highlights ongoing tensions between judicial authority and executive measures affecting social welfare.

The Supreme Court has deemed the government's attempts to save on pensioner payments through subordinate legislation unconstitutional. The official petition to the Constitutional Court stems from doubts about the legality of Article 46 of the State Budget Law and corresponding Cabinet of Ministers resolutions. The pension restrictions were introduced last year by Resolution No. 1, which set a maximum payment at the level of 10 subsistence minimums and introduced reducing coefficients. This year, the government adopted a new Resolution No. 1778, which renewed these restrictions for 2025.

Legal Implications and Protection Mechanism

Dmytro Korsun noted that the Cabinet of Ministers does not have the right to arbitrarily decide which coefficients to apply, thereby reducing payments to pensioners. According to him, this constitutes a gross violation of the Constitution, as it narrows the constitutional right to proper social protection. The case is part of a broader struggle to ensure that court-ordered payments to citizens are actually fulfilled by state bodies.

"The Pension Fund of Ukraine often acknowledges the debt based on a court recalculation, but for years does not pay the money, citing a lack of funding."

Dmytro Korsun, lawyer

The mechanism for changing the method of enforcing a court decision involves amending the resolutive part of the ruling from 'obligate to pay' to 'recover from the main department of the Pension Fund the amount of the debt.' According to Korsun, when the ruling states 'recover,' the initiative shifts from the Pension Fund to the Treasury, allowing the state treasury service to forcibly write off these funds from the Pension Fund's accounts as soon as they are received and transfer them to pensioners.

This Supreme Court petition to the Constitutional Court could become a significant milestone in Ukraine's human rights practice, as it underscores the critical role of the judiciary in protecting citizens' rights, particularly those of pensioners. The consideration of this issue may influence future government decisions on social payments, as well as the enforcement of court rulings, which is a vital aspect of a state governed by the rule of law.