The modern tendencies in the application of the principle of proportionality in judicial practice

Keywords: the principle of proportionality, justice, the rule of law, law enforcement, judicial practice, democracy

Abstract

This article examines modern views regarding the place and role of the principle of proportionality in the judicial practice. The principle of proportionality is originated from the concept of justice, but, as far as justice more like about philosophy, ethics and intuition, the principle of proportionality is a mechanism, that allows to ensure fair balance between competing values, usually rights and interests. The principle of proportionality is well-known in common law systems and has been widely developed in the European Court of Human Rights practice. Nevertheless, Ukraine have been establishing the rule of law for the past twenty years and its experience in the proportionality area is limited to academic studies and time-to-time quotations in the court decisions.

The recent Judicial reform in Ukraine established the Supreme Court, which is to restart the judicial process, to ensure the rule of law, to restrict the state in its activity in relation to human rights etc. This article shows some сcredible and bright examples of application of the principle of proportionality in the Supreme Court decisions. Moreover, these decisions show the deep analysis through the prism of proportionality and persuasive conclusions based on the principle of proportionality.

In conclusion, the article shows, that despite of positive tendencies in the application of the principle of proportionality, the overall level of its application remains very low. In most cases, courts put some quotations to enhance argumentation, but not to make full and deep analysis. The author believes, that academic studies will allow to improve global standards of justice in Ukrainian judicial practice and will make the principle of proportionality an integral part of all court decisions which question human rights.

References

Fukuyama, Francis. (1989) “The End of History?” The National Interest, 16, 3–18 [in English].
Shemshuchenko, Yu.S. (holova redkolehii). (1998). Yurydychna entsyklopediia: V 6 tomakh. Kyiv: «Ukr. Entsykl.». Tom 5 [in
Ukrainian].
Koziubra, M.I. (2007). Pryntsypy verkhovenstva prava i pravovoi derzhavy : iednist’ osnovnykh vymoh. Naukovi zapysky
NaUKMA. T. 64: Yurydychni nauky. 3–9 [in Ukrainian].
Vicki C. Jackson. (2014). Important Developments in Comparative Constitutional Law. 4, 219–230 [in English].
Key Developments in Constitutionalism and Constitutional Law; Eleven International publishing, The Hague, Netherlands, 2014 [in English].
Jonas Christofersen. (2009). A Study of Proportionality, Subsidiarity and Primarity in the European Convention on Human
Rights., Brill [in English].
Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 17.04.2019. URL: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/81652333 [in Ukrainian].
Ukhvala Velykoi Palaty Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 30.10.2018. URL: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/77507469 [in Ukrainian].
Postanova Ob’iednanoi Palaty Kasatsijnoho tsyvil’noho sudu u skladi Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 20.06.2018. URL:
http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/74963333 [in Ukrainian].
Luspenyk, D.D. (2017). Verkhovenstvo prava – “novyj” staryj prytsnyp tsyvil’noho sudochynstva: spivvidnoshennia iz pryntsypom zakonnosti. Pravo Ukrainy. 8, 9–20 [in Ukrainian].
Khart, Kh. L.A. (1998). Kontseptsiia prava. – Naukove vydannia. Kyiv: Sfera [in Ukrainian].
Pohrebniak, S.P. (2012). Pryntsyp proportsijnosti u sudovij diial’nosti. Filosofiia prava i zahal’na teoriia prava. 2, 49–55 [in
Ukrainian].
Shustrov, D.H. (2014). Pryntsyp proportsyonal’nosty v konstytutsyonnom prave Yzraylia. Moskovskyj hos. un-t ym. M.V. Lomonosova, Yurydycheskyj fak., Kaf. konstytutsyonnoho y munytsypal’noho prava. Moskva: URSS [in Russian].
How to Cite
Romashko, A. (1). The modern tendencies in the application of the principle of proportionality in judicial practice. Law Review of Kyiv University of Law, (3), 57-61. https://doi.org/10.36695/2219-5521.3.2019.09
Section
State and law theory and history. Philosophy of law