Objectives and desired results

1)      General objective 

The objective is to conduct a comprehensive review of the appointment (selection) and dismissal procedure of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine, with a view to aligning it with European best practice with the involvement of the Venice Commission.

2)     Specific objectives

 The specific objectives of the assignment are:

2.1.      Assessment of the existing national constitutional and legislative framework governing the appointment and dismissal of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine.

In particular, it shall evaluate the existing legal guarantees relating to:

•          the transparency and objectivity of the selection procedure;

•          eligibility criteria and professional requirements for candidates;

•          the length, stability, and security of the term of office;

•          the grounds and procedures for dismissal, including safeguards against arbitrary or politically motivated removal;

•          the availability and effectiveness of independent judicial review mechanisms.

2.2. Compliance analysis with European Standards and best practices from the selected EU Member States

The review shall assess the compatibility of the Ukrainian framework with relevant European standards and best practices, including:

•          Opinions, reports, and recommendations of the Venice Commission;

•          Opinions of the Consultative Council of European Prosecutors (CCPE);

•          Relevant case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR);

•          Comparative best practices from selected EU Member States.

2.3. Development of recommendations

Based on the findings of the assessment and compliance analysis, the review shall develop clear, reasoned, and actionable recommendations aimed at:

•          strengthening the independence and depoliticisation of the Prosecutor General position;

•          ensuring transparency and merit-based procedures;

•          enhancing legal certainty and institutional stability;

•          reinforcing safeguards against undue dismissal.

3)     Anticipated results

The Review shall be presented as a single, comprehensive analytical document based on the inputs provided by each expert.

The Review shall follow a clear and coherent analytical structure, including: Executive Summary; Introduction and Background; Overview of the Current Legal Framework; Assessment of the Appointment (Selection) Procedure; Assessment of the Dismissal Procedure; Compliance with European Standards; Comparative Analysis of Selected EU Member States’ Models; Recommendations for Future Reform; Annexes (where applicable).

The Review shall be prepared in both Ukrainian and English and shall ensure clarity, logical structure, and consistency of terminology.

Description of the assignment

4)     Planned activities

The assignment will be implemented by a team of experts composed of two national experts and one international expert. Each expert will contribute within their area of expertise while ensuring a coherent and integrated analytical output.

 International Expert on Prosecution Service

International Expert on Prosecution Service will conduct the comparative analysis of appointment and dismissal procedures in selected EU Member States, identifying transferable best practices adaptable to the Ukrainian legal (constitutional) framework. 

In particular, the Expert will:

1. Conduct a comparative analysis of appointment and dismissal procedures of Prosecutors General (or equivalent positions) in selected EU Member States; For the purposes of the analysis, the selection of EU Member States should be based on clear and transparent criteria. In particular, priority should be given to jurisdictions where the Venice Commission has previously issued opinions or assessments concerning the appointment or dismissal of Prosecutors General or equivalent chief prosecutorial authorities.

2. Analyse institutional models and practices ensuring independence, accountability, and depoliticisation of prosecution services and identify best practices applicable to the Ukrainian context;

3. In close cooperation with the other members of the expert team and taking into account the assessment of the existing national constitutional and legislative framework governing the appointment and dismissal of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine and compliance analysis with relevant European standards (as provided by the national and international experts), identify existing gaps and develop clear, well-reasoned, and actionable recommendations aimed at:

• strengthening the independence and depoliticisation of the position of Prosecutor General;

• ensuring transparent and merit-based procedures;

• enhancing legal certainty and institutional stability;

• reinforcing safeguards against undue dismissal. 

The Expert will also participate in coordination meetings and contribute to the drafting of the analytical Review.

 Deliverables

The Expert will:

·       Prepare a written analytical Review of the comparative analysis of appointment and dismissal procedures in selected EU Member States, identifying transferable best practices adaptable to the Ukrainian legal (constitutional) framework.

·       Review and provide comments on parts of the Review prepared by other experts;

·       Participate in the joint development of recommendations and contribute to both the draft and final versions of the Review.

Coordination 

The experts shall work under the overall supervision of the EU Project Pravo-Justice and in close coordination with the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine and other relevant stakeholders.

The assignment will be coordinated by: Halyna Dmytrychenko-Kuleba, Key Expert on PPO Reform
[email protected]; Anastasiia Kuzub, Project Officer [email protected] .

The experts shall maintain regular communication with the coordinators throughout the assignment and ensure timely sharing of deliverables, drafts, and relevant information.

Coordination meetings may be organised as necessary to discuss progress, address emerging issues, and ensure consistency of the analytical work.

The experts shall ensure close cooperation among themselves in order to deliver a coherent, consistent, and high-quality analytical Review.

Place, duration and terms of performance

1)     Implementation period: April - May 2026 (22 working days) 

2)     Start date: 1 April 2026

3)     End date:  31 May 2026

4)     Deadline for Applications: 15 March 2026, 11:59 p.m. (Kyiv time).        

Evaluation Criteria

Applications will be evaluated based on a combination of technical (quality) criteria and financial offer.

The maximum total score is 100 points, distributed as follows:

1.     Technical Evaluation: 90 points

2.     Financial Evaluation: 10 points

1. Technical Evaluation (90 points)

1)     General Qualifications and Professional Experience (20 points)

-        Advanced university degree (Master’s or higher) in law, international or European law, or public administration;

-        At least 10 years of relevant professional experience in criminal justice, prosecution services, constitutional or criminal law;

-        Overall relevance and depth of professional experience to the assignment.

2)     Specific Professional Experience (40 points)

-          Substantial experience in prosecution service in EU Member States. Holding senior administrative positions within the prosecution service or the Ministry of Justice shall be considered an asset.

-          Experience advising governments or international organisations on rule of law reforms

-          Strong understanding of institutional governance, safeguards of independence, and mechanisms of accountability.

3)     Analytical and Drafting Skills (20 points)

-        Proven experience in preparation of legal opinions, analytical reports, or legislative proposals;

-        Quality, clarity, and structure of previous work (as reflected in CV and motivation letter);

-        Ability to deliver complex legal analysis in a clear and structured manner.

4)     Language Skills (10 points)

-        Excellent written and oral communication skills in English;

-        Ability to prepare high-quality analytical documents in English.

2. Financial Evaluation (10 points)

The financial proposal shall be evaluated based on the proposed daily fee (rate).

The maximum number of points (10) will be awarded to the lowest priced offer.

Other offers will be scored proportionally according to the following formula:

Score = (Lowest Price / Offered Price) × 10

Evaluation Procedure

-        Only applications meeting the minimum eligibility criteria will be considered for further evaluation.

-        Candidates may be shortlisted based on the results of the desk evaluation.

-        Interviews may be conducted, if deemed necessary.

-        The contract will be awarded to candidates obtaining the highest overall score.

In the context of Ukraine’s ongoing EU accession process and the rule of law reforms, particular attention is devoted to strengthening the independence of the prosecutorial service.

It is widely recognised that Prosecutors General play a crucial role in managing prosecution services, serving as a key institutional safeguard for ensuring their independence and impartiality. In this context, particular importance is attached to guaranteeing their own independence and impartiality, including through the transparency of the appointment/election procedure, the length of their term of office, together with safeguards concerning their removal and against any form of undue interference with their work.

The Rule of Law Roadmap provides for conducting a comprehensive review of the selection and dismissal procedure in the Prosecutor General’s Office, with a view to aligning it with European best practices and with the involvement of the Venice Commission, by Q2 2027.

The EU Commission in its Ukraine Report 2025 in the framework of the Enlargement Package noted that the position of the Prosecutor General remains politicised. While the current constitutional and legislative framework provides for a formal procedure governing the appointment and dismissal of the Prosecutor General, its practical application over recent years raises concerns regarding the robustness of institutional safeguards. In practice, Prosecutors General have been removed in circumstances widely perceived as politically motivated, with assessments seemingly linked to political alignment or loyalty rather than objective performance criteria. This context underscores the need to critically examine whether the existing framework sufficiently protects the Office of the Prosecutor General from undue political influence. In particular, the concentration of decisive powers within political institutions, the absence of a structured, merit-based competitive pre-selection mechanism and the limited involvement of independent professional bodies may create vulnerabilities affecting both the actual and perceived independence of the Prosecutor General. To reduce the risk of politicisation, the selection and dismissal procedures for the Prosecutor General should be made more objective, transparent and merit-based in line with European standards. It was highlighted that in the coming year, Ukraine should adopt legislative amendments to make the selection and dismissal procedures for the Prosecutor General more objective, transparent and merit-based.

As a result, in December 2025, Ukraine further prioritised the implementation of the most relevant and effective measures for the coming year and developed the corresponding Action Plan, which, inter alia, provides for the conducting a comprehensive review of the selection and dismissal procedure of the Prosecutor General, with a view to aligning it with European best practice with the involvement of the Venice Commission.

In February 2026, the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine addressed the EU Project Pravo-Justice with a request to provide expert support in order to assist the Ministry in the implementation of the above-mentioned measure of the Action Plan.

Across EU Member States, there is considerable diversity in legal systems and institutional models governing the appointment or election of Prosecutors General. These models may involve the participation of parliament, prosecutorial self-governance bodies, or decisions by the head of state and/or government. Notwithstanding these differences, the Venice Commission, when assessing different models of appointment of Chief Prosecutors, has always been concerned with finding an appropriate balance between the requirement of democratic legitimacy of such appointments, on the one hand, and the requirement of depoliticisation, on the other.

European standards further recognize, that the appointment/election of the prosecutors general should not only be transparent, following established, objective criteria for the choice of candidates and free of undue interference, but also be perceived as such by the judicial and prosecutorial communities in particular, in addition to the public in general. This is important to foster not only trust within the judicial and prosecution services but also, crucially, public trust in the justice system.

Against this background, a comprehensive review of the current Ukrainian legal framework governing the appointment (selection) and dismissal of the Prosecutor General is required in order to assess its compliance with European best practices and to ensure its alignment therewith, including through the involvement of the Venice Commission.

Requirements

·        Advanced university degree (Master's or higher) in law, international and European law, public administration;

·        At least 10 years of relevant professional experience in criminal justice, prosecution services, constitutional/criminal law;

·        Proven analytical and drafting skills, including experience in preparing legal opinions, analytical reports, or legislative proposals;

·        Strong understanding of institutional governance, safeguards of independence, and mechanisms of accountability;

·        Excellent written and oral communication skills in English;

·        Substantial experience in prosecution service in EU Member States;

·        Experience advising governments or international organizations on rule of law reforms;

·        Holding senior administrative positions within the prosecution service or the Ministry of Justice shall be considered an asset.

Application modalities

Interested experts should submit their applications by 15 March 2026, 11:59 pm (Kyiv time).    

The applications should include:

• A detailed CV clearly demonstrating that the applicant meets the eligibility criteria (requirements);
• A motivation letter (maximum two pages) explaining how the applicant meets the expected requirements for the assignment, including a description of relevant previous professional experience.

A financial proposal, indicating the proposed daily fee in Euro.

All documents must be submitted in English.