StudLab for Justice 2.0: a research club with criminal justice practitioners

Changes in criminal justice do not begin with decisions or reforms alone. They begin with people — those who enter the system, the questions they ask, and the experience they bring.

That is why we need to work not only with those already in the profession but also with those just entering it. To create an environment where students can experiment, ask questions, work with real cases, and gradually develop their own professional thinking.

“Transformation of criminal justice is impossible without new people — those who bring fresh perspectives, who are ready to ask questions and challenge themselves, their colleagues, and the system. And we truly see this energy in Ukrainian youth. For us, working with students is a core priority. It is about the future and about responsibility for it. We want to create initiatives that become points of attraction, so that young legal professionals choose to stay, work, and build their future here. This is what ensures continuity — of both the system and the country,” says Vasylyna Yavorska, Team Lead at JustGroup.

The StudLab for Justice research club is about exactly this kind of interaction — an opportunity to move beyond classrooms and into the space where law is not explained but applied. That is why JustGroup implements this format together with its partners — the Supreme Court of Ukraine and the Faculty of Law of the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy — helping bridge academia and practice.

“From my perspective, this is a combination of creativity, initiative, and experience. Formats like this gradually shift the rigid approach to research, where it is often perceived as detached from practice. The topics students work on show that this is not the case — they are relevant and closely connected to real challenges. It is also important that this format brings together students from different law schools and experienced mentors. This is exactly the kind of process that changes the perception of research itself,” says Tetiana Fedosieieva, Deputy Dean of the Faculty of Law at NaUKMA.

The second cycle of the project continued this work, with new teams, new topics, and a new opportunity for students to test themselves in research alongside practitioners.

A space for collaboration

The second cycle of StudLab for Justice brought together 20 students from different cities and law schools across Ukraine:

• National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy
• Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University
• Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
• Ivan Franko National University of Lviv
• Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi Vinnytsia State Pedagogical University
• National Academy of Internal Affairs
• Dnipro State University of Internal Affairs
• Kharkiv National University of Internal Affairs
• Kyiv School of Economics

They worked in teams together with mentors — judges, prosecutors, lawyers, and detectives. Each team selected a topic and spent several months exploring it: working with court decisions, analysing approaches, conducting surveys, submitting requests, and formulating conclusions.

Among the mentors of this cycle:

• Viktoriia Azarian, Deputy Head of a NABU unit
• Rasim Babanly, First Deputy Chief of Staff of the Supreme Court
• Maryna Bondarenko, judge of the Darnytskyi District Court of Kyiv
• Stanislav Borys, Managing Partner at Vidar Law Firm
• Arkadii Bushchenko, judge of the Supreme Court
• Mykola Mazur, judge of the Supreme Court
• Dmytro Mykhailenko, judge of the Appeals Chamber of the High Anti-Corruption Court
• Serhii Shulhin, prosecutor at the Office of the Prosecutor General
• Maksym Chumak, prosecutor at the Office of the Prosecutor General
• Oleksandra Yanovska, judge of the Supreme Court

Topics the system deals with every day

The teams worked on issues that arise in the daily practice of investigators, prosecutors, and judges. Despite their different focus areas, all topics were united by a common context: pre-trial investigation as a key stage of criminal proceedings, where decisions shaping the outcome of cases are made.

Over several months, teams explored these topics and presented their findings at the final event:

• Seizure of virtual assets in criminal proceedings
• Determination of bail in exceptional cases: issues of legal certainty and judicial practice
• Mediation in criminal proceedings as a form of restorative justice
• Cryptocurrency as digital evidence in criminal proceedings
• Implementation of European standards in covert investigative (search) actions
• Urgent searches without a court warrant: legal necessity or abuse of power
• Balancing competing interests in the seizure of mobile devices
• Procedural configuration of investigative actions: transformation into interrogation
• Expert opinion as a source of evidence in criminal proceedings: issues of admissibility
• Procedural safeguards for defendants in cases of international crimes

All these topics concern decisions made daily at the pre-trial stage. This requires not only knowledge of legal norms, but also an understanding of how they function in practice — where challenges arise and how they can be addressed.

“What you are doing resonates strongly with me. When I was a student, research often felt disconnected from real practice. Today, you have access to a vast body of court decisions that can be analysed from multiple angles. This allows you to see patterns that are impossible to identify in isolated cases. And it is precisely this kind of research that can change approaches in both academia and practice,” notes Rasim Babanly.

How the projects were evaluated

All research projects were assessed by a jury of five experts representing the judiciary, academia, and legal practice:

• Nataliia Antoniuk, Deputy Head of the Criminal Cassation Court (Supreme Court)
• Vira Mykhailenko, judge of the High Anti-Corruption Court
• Mykola Khavroniuk, Professor at NaUKMA Faculty of Law
• Viktoriia Rohalska, Professor at Dnipro State University of Internal Affairs, JustGroup consultant
• Kyrylo Lehkykh, Associate Professor at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, lawyer

All submissions were anonymised, ensuring that the evaluation focused on substance rather than names. The jury assessed analytical depth, methodological clarity, practical relevance, originality, and the overall structure of the research.

Final at the Supreme Court

The final presentations took place on March 25, 2026, at the Supreme Court of Ukraine — a space where these issues are addressed daily in real decisions.

Teams presented their research, followed by Q&A and discussion with the jury. This format allowed participants to demonstrate not only their results but also their ability to defend their arguments and respond to feedback.

“We are deeply interested in ensuring that more people understand how the Supreme Court works. We do not just talk about it — we show it. It is important for young lawyers to see how the system functions and to understand their place within it. Our work is not only about reviewing cases, but also about shaping legal practice. I am convinced that initiatives like this bring value both to you and to the broader legal community,” said Stanislav Kravchenko, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

Based on the jury’s evaluation, three winning teams were selected:

• 1st place: Dmytro Mytchyk and Anastasiia Menshykova — Mediation in criminal proceedings as a form of restorative justice,
• 2nd place: Mykola Symonchuk and Kyrylo Yelsukov — Balancing competing interests in the seizure of mobile devices
• 3rd place: Zlata Rosomakha and Yelyzaveta Zakharchenko — Cryptocurrency as digital evidence in criminal proceedings

These projects demonstrated not only a high level of preparation but also the ability to engage with real systemic challenges. A special award for best presentation was also given to Dmytro Mytchyk and Anastasiia Menshykova.

What’s next

StudLab for Justice is not a one-time initiative. We already see how this format works: students gain practical experience, practitioners engage with new questions and perspectives, and the system benefits from a space where new approaches can emerge.

Most importantly, it creates an environment where research becomes a tool for impact.

We are grateful to all students who participated in the second cycle, as well as to the mentors who invested their time, expertise, and attention in this process.

Photo: Supreme Court