On the issue of the conformity of the main updated constitutional principles concerning the role of courts and jury in the administration of justice in Ukraine with international and European standards

Keywords: Constitution of Ukraine, reforming, constitutional principles, justice, courts, jury, international and European standards

Abstract

The reconsideration of the provisions of Ukrainian legislation, its adaptation to European legislation, the modernization of the provisions of the Constitution and laws of Ukraine in the context of the amendments on justice to the Constitution (June 2016) and of international and European standards is analyzed. This regards directly the role of courts and jury in the administration of justice, which has become the purpose of this article, since this issue had not been comprehensively researched, although on the issues of the judicial reform the leading legal scientific and educational institutions of Ukraine have already held scientific and practical conferences, forums, have published scientific articles. The opinions of scientists deserve special attention.

The Constitution assigns a leading place to justice. However, its provisions need improving. The lack of a unified approach to defining the concept of “justice” requires that it should be defined at the legislative level. The constitution of Ukraine has enshrined the determinative and irreplaceable role of courts in the administration of justice. Even in a state of emergency, only courts are authorized to give a judgment in the name of Ukraine in civil, criminal, economic and administrative matters. This perception of the role of courts is basically in line with international and European standards. Courts are created to guarantee the fair administration of justice, to protect the rights and freedoms of man and citizen. This is emphasized by a number of international and European instruments approved by the UN institutions, the Council of Europe, and EU institutions, in particular the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights, the opinions of the Venice Commission, the opinions of the Advisory Council of European Judges, etc. However, the constitutional provision “Ukraine may recognize the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court on the terms set out in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court” has not yet come into force, as the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine has not yet ratified the Rome Statute. The unconventional opinion of scientists regarding the provisions of the role of courts, as enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine and in European documents, is noteworthy. They see a philosophical and legal contradiction between Article 124 of the Constitution of Ukraine, which stipulates that justice in the state is administered exclusively by courts, and that the delegation of the functions of courts or the appropriation of these functions by other bodies or officials is not allowed, and Article 6 (Right to a fair trial) of the European Convention of Human Rights and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, which embodies that rule.

The reasonability of omitting the provision “Judicial procedure is carried out by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and courts of general jurisdiction” in the amended Constitution is questioned as, in the opinion of some scholars, such omitting contradicts the ground of a systematic approach to the organization of the judicial authority, turns the Constitutional Court of Ukraine into a political body. The replacement of the provision “the jury is directly involved in the administration of justice” with the provision “the justice is administered with the assistance of the jury” is a matter of debate. On the basis of the experience of the countries of the world and the critical analysis of Ukrainian legislation, the opinion is expressed on the necessity of modernizing such a form of democracy as a jury in Ukraine. The classic jury form, the division of powers of professional and non-professional subjects of justice, the independence of jurors from professional judges should be envisaged, which will contribute to a more effective deliverance of justice from administrative pressure and corruption.

References

Tatsij, V. Ya., Shemshuchenko, Yu. S., Kuznetsova, N. S., Sviatots’kyj, O. D. ta in. (2014) Utverdzhennia ievropejs’koi modeli
sudochynstva i verkhovenstva prava – priorytety sudovoi reformy ta vidnovlennia suspil’noi doviry do sudiv v Ukraini : interv’iu uchasnykiv forumu zhurnalu «Pravo Ukrainy». Pravo Ukrainy. 11, 74–135 [in Ukrainian]; Kopylenko, O.L. (2017) Sudova reforma v Ukraini: realii ta perspektyvy: materialy nauk.-prakt. Konferentsii 18.11.2016 r. Kyiv: Instytut zakonodavstva Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy [in Ukrainian]; Koziubra, M. I., Martseliak, O.V., Stetsiuk, P. B. ta in. (2016) Konstytutsijnyj protses: potochnyj rezul’tat, ryzyky i perspektyvy (Analitychna dopovid’ Tsentru Razumkova). Natsional’na bezpeka i oborona. 5–6, 3–52 [in Ukrainian];
Krusian, A.R. (2016) Konstytutsijna iustytsiia ta konstytutsijni peretvorennia v Ukraini. Ukrains’kyj chasopys konstytutsijnoho prava. 1, 31–36 [in Ukrainian];
Moskvych, L.M. (2018) Dovira do sudu: stan ta instrumenty vplyvu. Pravo Ukrainy. 3, 9–25 [in Ukrainian]; Selivanov, A.O. (2017) Sudova vlada maie projty reformu ponovlennia svoho avtorytetu i doviry. Holos Ukrainy [in Ukrainian];
Shemshuchenko, Yu.S. (2017) Sudova vlada v Ukraini: suchasna doktryna, mekhanizmy ta perspektyvy. Visnyk Natsional’noi akademii nauk Ukrainy. 2, 37–47 [in Ukrainian]; Scherbaniuk, O.V. (2018) Indyvidual’na konstytutsijna skarha iak zasib zabezpechennia konstytutsijnoi demokratii. Pravo Ukrainy. 12, 77–91 [in Ukrainian].
Konstytutsiia Ukrainy iz zminamy, vnesenymy zghidno iz zakonamy. (1996) Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy. 30. St. 141
[in Ukrainian].
Pro sudoustrij i status suddiv: Zakon Ukrainy vid 02.06.2016 r. №1402-VIII. Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy. 2016. № 31. St. 545 [in Ukrainian].
Pro pravovyj rezhym nadzvychajnoho stanu: Zakon Ukrainy vid 16.03.2000 r. № 1550-III. Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy. 2000. № 23. St. 176 [in Ukrainian].
Konventsiia pro zakhyst prav liudyny i osnovopolozhnykh svobod zi zminamy ta dopovnenniamy (Konventsiiu ratyfikovano Zakonom Ukrainy № 475/97-VR vid 17.07.1997 r.). URL: https://www.rada.gov.ua/ [in Ukrainian].
Vysnovok № 7 (2005) Konsul’tatyvnoi rady ievropejs’kykh suddiv do uvahy Komitetu Ministriv Rady Yevropy z pytannia
«Pravosuddia ta suspil’stvo». URL: http://www.arbitr.gov.ua [in Ukrainian].
Vysnovok № 20 (2017) Konsul’tatyvnoi rady ievropejs’kykh suddiv «Pro rol’ sudiv u zabezpechenni iednosti zastosuvannia
zakonu» vid 10.11.2017 r. URL: http://www.vru.gov.ua/content/file/ [in Ukrainian].
European judicial systems Efficiency and quality of justice CEPEJ Studies No. 26 2018 Edition (2016 data) – Systemy pravosuddia u Yevropi: efektyvnist’ ta iakist’ pravosuddia – 2018 rik (na osnovi danykh za 2016 r.). Yevropejs’ka komisiia z pytan’ efektyvnosti pravosuddia Rady Yevropy (CEPEJ). URL: https:// vkksu.gov.ua/userfiles/Rapport_avec_couv.pdf [in Ukrainian].
Promizhnyj vysnovok schodo zaproponovanykh zmin do Konstytutsii Ukrainy v chastyni pravosuddia. Vysnovok № 803/2015 CDL-PI(2015)016 vid 24.07.2015 r., zatverdzhenyj Venetsians’koiu komisiieiu. URL: https://vkksu.gov.ua [in Ukrainian].
Rymskyj statut mezhdunarodnoho uholovnoho suda yz yzmenenyiamy ot 17.07.1998 h. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_588 [in Ukrainian].
Pro vnesennia zmin do Konstytutsii Ukrainy (schodo pravosuddia): Zakon Ukrainy vid 02.06.2016 r. №1401-VIII. Vidomosti
Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy. 2016. № 28. St. 532 [in Ukrainian].
Uhoda pro asotsiatsiiu mizh Ukrainoiu, z odniiei storony, ta Yevropejs’kym Soiuzom, Yevropejs’kym spivtovarystvom z atomnoi enerhii i ikhnimy derzhavamy-chlenamy, z inshoi storony / Uhodu ratyfikovano iz zaiavoiu Zakonom № 1678-VII vid 16.09.2014 r. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua /laws/show/984_011 [in Ukrainian].
Pryluts’kyj, S. (2018) Sud iak pershoosnova predmeta sudovoho prava Ukrainy. Pravo Ukrainy. 3, 46–47 [in Ukrainian].
Moskvych, L.M. (2018) Vysnovky ta rekomendatsii z aktual’noi temy. Pravo Ukrainy. 3, 124 [in Ukrainian].
Kotiuk, I.I. (2017) Chy mozhlyve pravosuddia… Holos Ukrainy. 29 hrudnia, 8 [in Ukrainian].
Moskvych, L.M. (2018) Dovira do sudu: stan ta instrumenty vplyvu. Pravo Ukrainy. 3, 12–13 [in Ukrainian].
Pro sudoustrij i status suddiv: Zakon Ukrainy (07.07.2010 r. № 2453-VI). Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy. 2010. 41–42,
43, 44–45, 529 [in Ukrainian].
Kryminal’nyj protsesual’nyj kodeks Ukrainy (13.04.2012 r. № 4651-V). Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy. 2013. 9–10,
11–12, 13, 88 [in Ukrainian].
Sud prysiazhnykh v Ukraini: mif chy real’nist’? / Tsentr hromadians’kykh svobod. 18 lypnia 2017 roku. URL: https://ccl.org.ua/news/ [in Ukrainian].
How to Cite
Rudyk, P. (1). On the issue of the conformity of the main updated constitutional principles concerning the role of courts and jury in the administration of justice in Ukraine with international and European standards. Law Review of Kyiv University of Law, (2), 54-59. https://doi.org/10.36695/2219-5521.2.2019.09
Section
Constitutional law. Municipal law