The terms of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

The terms of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice

СТРОКИ ТИМЧАСОВОГО ВІДСТОРОНЕННЯ СУДДІ ВІД ЗДІЙСНЕННЯ ПРАВОСУДДЯ

Pochynok V.M.,

Postgraduate Student at the Department of Criminal Procedure and Criminalistics of the Faculty of Law of Ivan Franko National University of Lviv

Стаття присвячена дослідженню питання строків такого заходу забезпечення кримінального провадження, як тимчасове відсторонення судді від здійснення правосуддя у зв'язку із притягненням його до кримінальної відповідальності. Автор акцентує на тому, що регулювання питання строків є важливим для практичної реалізації вищезгаданого заходу забезпечення. У статті наголошується, що правильне застосування і дотримання строків тимчасового відсторонення судді від здійснення правосуддя дасть змогу не тільки підвищити довіру суспільства до судової влади, а й ефективно застосовувати цей захід забезпечення кримінального провадження і забезпечити належне його функціонування. Автором зазначено строки тимчасового відсторонення судді від здійснення правосуддя та виокремлено підстави для їх продовження. У статті досліджено історичний аспект застосування строків тимчасового відсторонення судді від здійснення правосуддя. Висвітлено законодавчі норми щодо питання тимчасового відсторонення судді від здійснення правосуддя, строків такого відсторонення та їх продовження. Проаналізована судова практика вищезазначеної проблематики та сформовані висновки щодо практичного регулювання. Автором виділено важливі процедурні гарантії забезпечення незалежності та недоторканності суддів як дотримання процесуальних строків, а також процесуальної форми під час ухвалення рішення про тимчасове відсторонення судді від посади. У статті сформульовані висновки щодо важливості законодавчого закріплення та належного правового регулювання строків тимчасового відсторонення судді від здійснення правосуддя та їх продовження.

Ключові слова: тимчасове відсторонення судді від здійснення правосуддя, строки тимчасового відсторонення судді від здійснення правосуддя, продовження строку тимчасового відсторонення судді від здійснення правосуддя, клопотання про продовження строку тимчасового відсторонення судді від здійснення правосуддя, розгляд клопотання про продовження строку тимчасового відсторонення судді від здійснення правосуддя Вищою радою правосуддя.

The article deals with the issue of the terms of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice in connection with bringing him to criminal liability. The author emphasizes that the terms regulation is important for the practical implementation of the aforementioned measure to ensure criminal proceedings. In the article it is asserted that the proper regulation and observance of the terms of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice will not only promote public trust in the judiciary, but also will help effectively apply such a security measure of criminal proceedings and provide its proper functioning. The author specifies the terms of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice and identifies the grounds for their extension. In the article the researcher presents the historical aspect of the application of the terms of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice. The legislative norms of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice are highlighted, as well as the terms of such suspension and their extension. The court practice of the aforementioned issues is analyzed and the conclusions on practical regulation are made. The author singles out the following important procedural guarantees of ensuring the independence and immunity of a judge: procedural terms observance and the procedural form when issuing a decree about a judge temporary suspension from office. In the article the conclusions as to the proper regulation and observance of the terms of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice are made; they will promote the effective functioning and application of this ensurance measure in the criminal proceedings. judge temporary suspension

Key words: temporary suspension of a judge from administering justice; the terms of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice; extension of the period of a judge suspension from administering justice; motion for extension of the period of temporary suspension of a judge from administering justice; motion consideration for extension of the period of a judge suspension from administering justice by the High Council of Justice.

The issue of the application of the terms of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice and their extension in the pre-trial investigation raises a lot of discussions in practice. Though, as the practice of its implementation has shown, there are certain questions that determine the necessity of its research and the discussion.

Many national scholars, such as O.V Baulin, Y.M. Demin, Y.M. Groshevyi, S. Zavada, O.V. Kaplina, M.M. Mikheenko, V.T. Nor, D.O. Savitsky, V.I. Farin- nik, O.G. Shilo etc., have analyzed the issue of applying the preventive measures in the criminal process, in particular the dismissal from office. At the end of 2016e determined security measure as a judge temporary suspension from administering justice was fixed in the law. Thereby the judicial practice of applying a judge temporary suspension from administering justice has not been sufficiently researched yet and the doctrine of the law of criminal procedure has not given the appropriate conclusions of this issue.

The key-points of this article are to analyze the judicial practice of regulating the terms of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice and the grounds for their extension; to identify problematic practical issues; to formulate relevant conclusions, aimed to improve the legislation and practice for applying such a security measure.

The issue of a judge suspension from administering justice dates back to the 14th century, when our state was a part of the Polish kingdom. Even at that time, the judges were responsible for offences and were dismissed from their positions. And even during the development of the Roman Empire, judges would bear personal responsibility to the victim (without establishing the judge's guilt) within the framework of responsibility for committing a quasi-delict.

The importance issue of the control and supervision of the judges was discussed by many pre-revolutionary lawyers, scholars and practitioners. At one time, A.V Zavadskyi, the famous Russian lawyer, asserted that from the guarantees of independence and irremovability of judges it does not follow that the judge should be uncontrollable and unpunished: absolute “irremovability”, does not mean a proper organization of justice (a judge's service for life, regardless of his behaviour). There should not be unskillful judges or those who carelessly perform their duties, demonstrate their malicious character; is it natural that society and a state should endure them because of removal impossibility? “Further the author expressed the opinion that it would be necessary to introduce the norms «about supervision and measures of influence on judges. Using the measures of influence which gradually rises from a warning up to dismissal from the post, that will be combined with criminal punishment to maintain the judicial status at the appropriate level” [6].

Analyzing the legal liability of a judge and his temporary suspension from administering justice, we should pay attention to the grounds established by law that regulate such suspension. They are sufficient grounds, which determine what measures are necessary to avert a crime, to stop or prevent the misconduct of a suspected or accused person who, occupying the office, may destroy or forge the documents and materials in the case, that are relevant to the pre-trial investigation as well as by unlawful actions to influence the witnesses and other participants to the criminal proceedings.

According to the part 1 of the Article 63 of the Law of Ukraine “On the High Council of Justice”, a judge temporary suspension from administering justice in connection with bringing him/her to criminal liability, is carried out by the High Council of Justice for a term not exceeding two months on the basis of a grounded motion of the Prosecutor General or his Deputy. At the same time, at the stage of judicial proceedings, the term of suspension is set before a sentence comes into force or the criminal proceedings are closed.

However, a two-month term for temporary suspension is not exhaustive. In particular, under part six of the Article 49 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Judiciary and Status of Judges”, extension is fixed and is carried out for a period not more than two months. Moreover, the motion for extending such a term shall also be submitted by the Prosecutor General or his Deputy to the High Council of Justice, not later than ten days before the expiration term for which the judge has been suspended.

Similarly, this issue is regulated by the Article 64 of the Law of Ukraine “On the High Council of Justice”. According to this law, the extension of the period of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice in connection with bringing him/her to criminal liability is carried out in accordance with the procedure stipulated by the Article 63 of this Law for the temporary suspension of a judge from administering justice, for a term not exceeding two months, and in case when an act of indictment is filed to the court - before the sentence entry into force or the closure of the criminal proceedings.

It should be emphasized that in order to extend the term of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice, the circumstances that became the grounds for dismissal should exist further. At the same time, it should be proved that the prosecution party was unable to ensure the achievement of the goals for which the dismissal from office occurred by other ways during the validity of the previous court ruling.

However, extension of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice is only one of the issues that causes a lot of discussions in practice. Though even more questions arise when the term of the pre-trial investigation expires, and the grounds for a judge temporary suspension are present. It should be noted, that the term of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice should be applied within the terms of pretrial investigation. Actually, in practice there are contradictions concerning this issue application. According to the general rules of the Code of Criminal Procedure, pre-trial investigation should be completed within two months from the day the person was informed about the suspicion of having committed a crime. To solve this issue one should apply the rules of Section 4 Chapter 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which stipulate that the period of pre-trial investigation may be extended and on what grounds.

Practical regulation of the above-mentioned issues is observed in the following court practice. Thus, the High Council of Justice satisfied the motion of N.I. Kholod- nitsky, the Deputy Prosecutor-General, head of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office, about the extension of the term of suspending the judge of the Primorskyi District Court of the city of Mariupol, Donetsk Region, I.A. Sarajev from administering justice as for bringing him to criminal liability [4].

The merits of the case are the following. On December 7, 2018, the Deputy Prosecutor - General made a notification of suspicion to judge, I.A. Sarajev in criminal offence commission foreseen by part three Article 368 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, that was served to him on the same day. The judge was temporary suspended for a term of two months.

Before the term expiration, the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor in a motion to the High Council of Justice made a request to extend a judge temporary suspension from administering justice for a month more. Taking into account the risks related to the administering justice by the suspended judge, the High Council of Justice reached a conclusion that the request of the Deputy Prosecutor General to extend the judge temporary suspension from administering justice for a prolonged period of the pre-trial investigation until March 7, 2019 should be satisfied.

Another example is the Decision of the High Council of Justice No. 4l9/0/15-19 of February 12, 2019 as for partial satisfaction of the motion of the Deputy Prosecutor General to extend the term of suspension to Judge L.M. Kril from administering justice as regards bringing him to criminal liability [5]. In this decision, the High Council of Justice also extended the period of temporary suspension of the judge from administering justice until the day of the pre-trial investigation expiration period.

It is worth supporting the above-mentioned decisions of the High Council of Justice. Since the following should be taken into account, in order to provide all procedural guarantees of the criminal proceedings. Firstly, the investigation of the merits of the case concerning a judge temporary suspension from administering justice should be carried out only within the established terms of pre-trial investigation. Secondly, the grounds for temporary suspension of a judge must be determined before the expiration term both of a judge temporary suspension and the terms of the pre-trial investigation. Thirdly, it is not permissible to elucidate the reasons for suspending a judge from administering justice after the expiration terms of the pre-trial investigation.

Analyzing the above-stated, we can define the following important procedural guarantees of ensuring the independence and immunity of a judge: procedural terms observance and the procedural form when issuing a decree about a judge temporary suspension from office. In particular: (a) a motion for a judge temporary suspension from administering justice as for bringing him to criminal liability, filed without compliance with the requirements established by law, shall be returned back by the High Council of Justice to the Prosecutor General of Ukraine or his Deputy; (b) the motion for extension of the term of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice shall be submitted by the Prosecutor General of Ukraine or his Deputy not later than ten days before the expiration term for which the judge was suspended; (c) in case of a judge detention, during or immediately after committing a serious crime or especially grave crime, detention is held through a regular procedure determined by the Code of Criminal Procedure without the consent of the High Council of Justice; (d) a copy of the decision of the High Council of Justice on suspension from office shall be sent to the Prosecutor - General of Ukraine or his Deputy, as well as to the judge, and shall be directed immediately to the court in which the judge holds the office; (e) the judge may be suspended from administering justice from the date of the decision of the High Council of Justice for a term specified in such a decision, but not exceeding two months. At the stage of judicial proceedings, the suspension term is established prior to the sentence entry into force or the closure of criminal proceedings [7, p. 113].

The issue of public trust promotion in the judiciary, its proper functioning and development is not possible without the application in certain cases of the ensur- ance measures of criminal proceedings against judges. Since the judicial office requires not only immunity and independence, but also judge's personal responsibility and his proper conduct before the state and society. However, when applying any of the measures to ensure criminal proceedings, not least is to regulate the terms of such a specific measure application. Proper regulation and observance of the terms of a judge temporary suspension from administering justice will promote the effective functioning and application of this ensurance measure in the criminal proceedings.

References

Кримінальний процесуальний кодекс України від 13.04.2012 р. № 4651-VI. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/ show/4651-17 (дата звернення: 20.05.2019).

Про Вищу раду правосуддя : Закон України від 21.12.2016 р. № 1798-VIII. URL: http://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/ show/1798-19 (дата звернення: 20.05.2019).

Про судоустрій і статус суддів : Закон України від 02.06.2016 р. № 1402-VIII. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/ show/1402-19 (дата звернення: 20.05.2019).

Про продовження строку тимчасового відсторонення судді Приморського районного суду міста Маріуполя Донецької області Сараєва І.А. від здійснення правосуддя у зв'язку з притягненням до кримінальної відповідальності : Рішення Вищої ради правосуддя № 220/0/15-19 від 29.01.2019 р. URL: http://www.vru.gov.ua/act/17171 (дата звернення: 20.05.2019).

Про часткове задоволення клопотання Холодницького Н.І. про продовження строку тимчасового відсторонення судді Кріля Л.М. від здійснення правосуддя у зв'язку з притягненням до кримінальної відповідальності : Рішення Вищої ради правосуддя № 419/0/15-19 від 12.02.2019 р. uRl: http://www.vru.gov.ua/act/17370 (дата звернення: 20.05.2019).

Гончаренко О.В. Формування органів державного управління формуванням суддівського корпусу. Історико- філософський журнал: веб-сайт. URL: http://www.vru.gov.ua/Docs/a110110.pdf (дата звернення: 20.05.2019).

Овчаренко О.М. Процедура притягнення судді до кримінальної відповідальності у світлі судової реформи 2016 року: актуальні питання. Доступ до правосуддя у контексті судової реформи: матер. Загальнонаціонального юридичного форуму. Сєвєродонецьк, 2018. С. 113.

Размещено на Allbest.ru