Legal means of procuring the unity application of the criminal procedure law

Study of the system of legal means to ensure the unity of judicial practice. Overview of the theoretical provisions that determine the socio-legal value of the unity of law enforcement practice. Methodological remarks on the unity of judicial practise.

Рубрика Государство и право
Вид статья
Язык английский
Дата добавления 07.09.2021
Размер файла 60,1 K

Отправить свою хорошую работу в базу знаний просто. Используйте форму, расположенную ниже

Студенты, аспиранты, молодые ученые, использующие базу знаний в своей учебе и работе, будут вам очень благодарны.

In the authors' opinion, the system of legal means to ensure the unity of application of the law in the field of criminal proceedings consists of a set of interrelated elements:

1. Criminal procedural law that meets the standards of its quality.

2. Judicial decisions - procedural decisions of courts of appeal and cassation, which are valuable guidelines in the interpretation and application of the law.

3. Decisions (rulings) of the Supreme Court that resolve existing differences in judicial practise (controversial issues of law enforcement).

4. Legal regulation of the necessary degree of binding decisions of the Supreme Court and the possibility of derogation from its legal positions by lower courts, as well as the Supreme Court itself.

According to their functional purpose, these tools can be both preventive and restorative. However, most of them perform both functions. Thus, in particular, the decision of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of an exclusive legal problem, although directly aimed at restoring the violated legal regime of legality, nevertheless warns in the future of incorrect application of certain legal norms by judges. Although certain elements are by their nature a variety of others, their separate consideration is methodologically justified given their special functional load in the general process of ensuring the unity of judicial practise.

CONCLUSIONS

The socio-legal value of a single application of the same substantive or procedural rule in such legal relations, first of all, is to exercise the right of everyone to a fair trial, guaranteed by Article 6 of the CPC, and also manifests itself in ensuring a reasonable trial judicial system, minimising corruption risks in the field of criminal proceedings, increasing the level of public confidence in the court and its authority in the state, guided by the rule of law. The system of legal means to ensure the unity of application of the law in the field of criminal proceedings consists of a set of interconnected elements, which are proposed to include the criminal procedure law that meets the standards of its quality; court decisions - procedural decisions of courts of appeal and cassation, which are valuable guidelines in the interpretation and application of the law; decisions (rulings) of the Supreme Court that resolve existing differences in judicial practise (disputed issues of law enforcement); legal regulation of the necessary degree of binding nature of the decisions of the Supreme Court and the possibility of deviation from its legal positions by lower courts, as well as the Supreme Court itself. The allocated legal means of ensuring the unity of application of the law are the direction of their further substantive research in order to formulate scientifically sound proposals for improving the criminal procedure law and the practise of its application.

REFERENCES

1. Wildhaber, L. (2001). Precedent at the European Court of Human Rights. State and Law, 12, 10.

2. Shevchuk, S. (2012). The Role of the Supreme Court in Contexts of Constitutional Democracy. Law of Ukraine, 11-12, 89-100.

3. The Consultative Council of European Judges No. 20 “On the role of courts with respect to the uniform application of the law”. (2017, November). Retrieved from http://www.vru.gov.ua/content/file/Висновок_КРЄС_20.pdf

4. Valancius, B. (2012). Why Unified Court Practice? Law of Ukraine, 11-12, 137143.

5. Bobechko, N.R. (2018). Novelties of the criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine in the context of ensuring the unity of judicial practice. Journal of the National University of “Ostroh Academy ”. Law Series, 1(17), 11-12.

6. Demenchuk, M.O. (2018). The role of the Supreme Court in ensuring the unity of the jurisprudence in Ukraine. (Thesis for the degree of Ph.D, National University “Odesa Law Academy”, Odesa, Ukraine).

7. Report of the European Commission “For democracy through Law”. (2011, March). Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default. aspx?pdffile=CDL- AD(2011)003rev-ukr.

8. Korkunov, N.M. (1909). Lectures on the general theory of law. St. Petersburg: Magazin N. K. Martynova.

9. Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights No. 44698/06 “Case of Vincic and others v. Serbia”. (2009, December). Retrieved from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/rus?i=001-95959

10. Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights No. 21911/03 “Case of Tudor Tudor v. Romania”. (2009, March). Retrieved from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/rus?i=001-91885.

11. Speech by the Chairman of the Supreme Court of Ukraine Yaroslav Romanyuk at a roundtable meeting on the impact of the reform of the judiciary of Ukraine on ensuring the unity of judicial practice (2014). Retrieved from https://zib.com.ua/ua/print/93479-vistup_golovi_verhovnogo_sudu_ukraini_yaroslava_romanyuka_na.html.

12. Ivanova, S.A. (2005). Some problems of the implementation of the principle of social justice, reasonableness and good faith in the law of obligations. Legislation and Economics, 4, 29-34.

13. Nagin, D.S., & Telep, C.W. (2017). Procedural Justice and Legal Compliance. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 13, 5-28.

14. Kang, H.W. (2018). Landmark Cases in Criminal Law. New Journal of European Criminal Law, 9(1), 164-165.

15. Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights No. 18650/09 “Case of Tomic and others v. Montenegro”. (2012, April). Retrieved from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/rus?i=001-110384.

16. Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights No. 13279/05 “Case of Sahin and Shahin v. Turkey”. (2011, October). Retrieved from http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/rus?i=001-107156.

17. Sicurella, R. (2018). Fostering a European criminal law culture: In trust we trust. New Journal of European Criminal Law, 9(3), 308-325.

18. Strogovich, M.S., Alekseeva, L.B., & Larin, A.M. (1979). Soviet criminal procedure law and problems of its effectiveness. Moscow: Nauka.

19. Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights No. 980/065 “Case of Christine Goodwin v. The United Kingdom”. (2002, July). Retrieved from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/980_065#Text.

20. Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights No. 21722/11 “Case of Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine”. (2013, January). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_947

21. Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights No. 44158/98 “Case of Gordjelik and Others v. Poland”. (2004, February). Retrieved from http://search.ligazakon.ua/l_doc2.nsf/link1/SO0759.html.

Размещено на Allbest.ru

...

Подобные документы

Работы в архивах красиво оформлены согласно требованиям ВУЗов и содержат рисунки, диаграммы, формулы и т.д.
PPT, PPTX и PDF-файлы представлены только в архивах.
Рекомендуем скачать работу.