Disciplinary Practice of Regional Bar Associations in 2025: A Statistical Analysis
According to the Statistical Report of the National Association of Advocates of Ukraine (NAAU) for 2025 (Annex No. 3), eleven Qualification and Disciplinary Commissions of the Bar provided complete or partial data on the disciplinary sanctions applied. The total number of complaints across the ten QDCAs that reported relevant information amounted to 1,558. Notably, the QDCA of Chernihiv Oblast did not provide data on the total number of complaints filed, while information on sanctions applied was nonetheless reported by that commission.
Across all eleven QDCAs combined, 457 disciplinary sanctions were recorded, including: warnings — 194 (42.5%), suspensions of the right to practise law — 203 (44.4%), and disbarments — 60 (13.1%). Thus, suspension constitutes the most common sanction (combined with disbarment — 57.6% of all sanctions), indicating a predominance of stringent forms of response over cautionary ones.
The highest absolute number of sanctions was recorded in the QDCA of Kharkiv Oblast (154), QDCA of Poltava Oblast (134), and QDCA of Rivne Oblast (64). At the same time, the number of complaints varies significantly — from 8 (QDCA of Kirovohrad Oblast) to 404 (QDCA of Kyiv Oblast) — which precludes meaningful comparison of disciplinary activity without normalisation of indicators.
| QDCA | Complaints (total) | Warnings | Suspensions | Disbarments | Sanctions (total) |
| QDCA of Donetsk Oblast | 98 | 8 | 4 | 0 | 12 |
| QDCA of Zakarpattia Oblast | 73 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 6 |
| QDCA of Kyiv Oblast | 404 | 15 | 17 | 0 | 32 |
| QDCA of Kirovohrad Oblast | 8 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| QDCA of Odesa Oblast | 195 | 9 | 13 | 2 | 24 |
| QDCA of Poltava Oblast | 268 | 93 | 41 | 0 | 134 |
| QDCA of Rivne Oblast | 65 | 56 | 7 | 1 | 64 |
| QDCA of Ternopil Oblast | 96 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 8 |
| QDCA of Kharkiv Oblast | 205 | 5 | 97 | 52 | 154 |
| QDCA of Chernivtsi Oblast | 45 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 10 |
| QDCA of Chernihiv Oblast | — | 0 | 10 | 2 | 12 |
PUNITIVENESS INDEX OF DISCIPLINARY PRACTICE
To measure the qualitative severity of disciplinary practice, a Punitiveness Index (PI) has been applied — an indicator that reflects not the quantity, but the ‘weight’ of the chosen sanctions. The calculation formula is:
PI = (nmedium × 1 + nserious × 2) / (N × 2)
where n_medium is the number of suspensions of the right to practise law; n_serious is the number of disbarments; N is the total number of sanctions. The index ranges from 0 (exclusively warnings) to 1.0 (exclusively disbarments).
The results reveal significant interregional differentiation. The highest punitiveness index was recorded in the QDCA of Kharkiv Oblast — 0.653 — indicating a predominance of the most severe sanctions: 97 suspensions and 52 disbarments out of 154 total sanctions. The second position is held by the QDCA of Chernihiv Oblast — 0.583 (10 suspensions + 2 disbarments); however, the absence of data on the total number of complaints precludes a full analysis of that commission’s disciplinary caseload.
The lowest indices are found in the QDCAs of Rivne (0.070) and Poltava (0.153) oblasts, where warnings predominate. The average PI across all QDCAs is 0.353, corresponding to a moderately severe level.
| QDCA | n_medium (suspensions) | n_serious (disbarments) | N (total sanctions) | Punitiveness Index (PI) |
| QDCA of Donetsk Oblast | 4 | 0 | 12 | 0.167 |
| QDCA of Zakarpattia Oblast | 3 | 0 | 6 | 0.250 |
| QDCA of Kyiv Oblast | 17 | 0 | 32 | 0.266 |
| QDCA of Kirovohrad Oblast | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.500 |
| QDCA of Odesa Oblast | 13 | 2 | 24 | 0.354 |
| QDCA of Poltava Oblast | 41 | 0 | 134 | 0.153 |
| QDCA of Rivne Oblast | 7 | 1 | 64 | 0.070 |
| QDCA of Ternopil Oblast | 5 | 1 | 8 | 0.438 |
| QDCA of Kharkiv Oblast | 97 | 52 | 154 | 0.653 |
| QDCA of Chernivtsi Oblast | 5 | 2 | 10 | 0.450 |
| QDCA of Chernihiv Oblast | 10 | 2 | 12 | 0.583 |
| Total | 203 | 60 | 457 | 0.353 |
Note. For the QDCA of Chernihiv Oblast, the PI was calculated on the basis of sanctions data only; the total number of complaints is unknown.
The disciplinary practice of the QDCAs in 2025 is characterised by a predominance of severe sanctions at the national level (PI = 0.353), with pronounced asymmetry across regions — ranging from an almost exclusively cautionary model (Rivne) to a predominantly punitive one (Kharkiv). This indicates the absence of unified standards for the application of disciplinary sanctions and the need for methodological harmonisation of QDCA practice within the unified bar community.
