The right to protection in the practice of national courts and international judicial institutions whose jurisdiction is recognized by Ukraine

Issue: № 12, 2022

Doi: https://doi.org/10.37634/efp.2022.12.6

It is noted that in order to establish the content of the right to defense, it is necessary to study the interpretation of the right to defense in the practice of national courts. The list of the main circumstances that were considered by the European Court of Human Rights in the decisions against Ukraine in the context of the violation of the right to defense was determined. The inexhaustibility of the circumstances that may constitute a violation of the right to defense, which are the result of judicial discretion, is emphasized; judicial discretion refers to the judge's power to make decisions based on his individual judgment, guided by principles of justice and law. It was determined that the consequences of judicial discretion are determined by its compliance with the requirements of the law, motivation, justice and objectivity. According to the results of the study of the decisions of national courts - resolutions of the CCS of the Supreme Court, it was established that the CCS of the Supreme Court gave an assessment as a violation of the right to defense in the following cases: conducting an investigative action; consideration of the case in the appellate procedure in the absence of the convicted person, who was a minor at the time of the crime, and his lawyer; failure to ensure the participation of a defense attorney at all stages of court proceedings against a person convicted of committing particularly serious crimes, including during the review of court decisions based on newly discovered circumstances; consideration in the court of appeals of the prosecutor's appeal, in which the question is raised about the deterioration of the condition of the convicted person, in the absence of the latter, or in the absence of the defendant who is in custody, as well as his defender, who had not previously participated in this criminal proceeding; the trial in the appeals court was started without finding out whether the convicted person and his defense attorney were properly notified of the date and time of the hearing, holding a hearing in the appeals court without the participation of the defense attorney who was not properly notified of the hearing, including in those cases when the court unreasonably ignores the request of the defense party to postpone the court session; holding a trial in a court of first instance or appellate instance with the participation of a person who, due to mental disabilities, is unable to fully exercise his rights, in the absence of a defense attorney, or the absence of verification of the need to ensure the mandatory participation of a defense attorney in criminal proceedings against persons who, due to mental or physical disabilities defects are not able to fully realize their rights.

Keywords : the right to protection, practice of national courts, international judicial institutions, jurisdiction, justice, judicial discretion, decisions of the European Court of Human Rights

References:

1. Petryshyn O. Judicial practice as a source of law in Ukraine: problems of theory. Law of Ukraine. 2016. No. 10. pp. 20-28 (in Ukrainian).

2. Resolution of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Ukraine dated March 1, 2018 in case No. 760/13866/15-k. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/72642008 (in Ukrainian).

3. Resolution of the CCS of the Supreme Court of October 23, 2018 in case No. 158/2313/15-k. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/77393408 (in Ukrainian).

4. Resolution of the CC of the Supreme Court of June 19. 2018 in case No. 444/430/16-k. URL: www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/74963597 (in Ukrainian).

5. Resolution of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Ukraine dated March 19, 2019 in case No. 592/9692/17 (proceedings No. 51-5358km18). URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/80681497 (in Ukrainian).

6. Resolution of the CCS of the Supreme Court dated 13.12.2018 in case No. 1-34/03. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/78750763 (in Ukrainian).

7. Resolution of the CCS of the Supreme Court dated March 19, 2019 in case No. 1-59/2010 (proceedings No. 51-5562km18). URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/80716249 (in Ukrainian).

8. resolution of the Supreme Court of Justice dated June 27, 2018 in case No. 203/133/17 URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/75149563 (in Ukrainian).

9. Resolution of the CCS of the Supreme Court of January 31, 2019 in case No. 489/2741/17 URL: www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/79616457 (in Ukrainian).

10. Resolution of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Ukraine dated March 12, 2019 in case No. 127/2548/17. URL: www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/80521833 (in Ukrainian).

11. Resolution of the CCS of the Supreme Court dated March 14, 2019 in case No. 223/452/17 URL: www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/805558294 (in Ukrainian).

12. Resolution of the CCS of the Supreme Court dated March 20, 2019 in case No. 748/350/16-k (proceedings No. 51-5429км18). URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/80681503 (in Ukrainian).

13. Resolution of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Ukraine dated November 22, 2018 in case No. 367/2029/17 (proceedings No. 51-3214км18). URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/78129794 (in Ukrainian).

14. Resolution of the CCS of the Supreme Court dated September 25, 2018 in case No. 444/2348/16-k. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/76812102 (in Ukrainian).

15. Resolution of the Supreme Court of Appeals Committee dated May 15, 2018 in case No. 698/677/15-k. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/74121048 (in Ukrainian).

16. Resolution of the CCS of the Supreme Court dated January 31, 2019 in case No. 186/1252/17. URL: www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/79684816 (in Ukrainian).

17. Decision of the Supreme Court dated January 10, 2019 in case No. 656/234/17. URL: www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/79173863 (in Ukrainian).

18. Resolution of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Ukraine dated April 10, 2019 in case No. 444/797/18. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/81234917 (in Ukrainian).

19. Resolution of the CCS of the Supreme Court of 21.03. 2019 in case No. 353/627/17. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/80751587 (in Ukrainian).

20. Resolution of the CC of the Supreme Court of February 13, 2018 in case No. 425/915/16-k. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/72243746 (in Ukrainian).

21. Resolution dated March 13, 2018 in case No. 360/2367/16-k. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/72850708 (in Ukrainian).

22. Resolution dated November 8, 2018 in case No. 489/3209/16-k. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/7780139 (in Ukrainian).

23. Resolution of the CCC of the Supreme Court dated June 21, 2018 in case No. 748/1061/16-k. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/74963670 (in Ukrainian).

24. Resolution of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Ukraine dated February 28, 2019 in case No. 330/2292/14-k. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/80304865 (in Ukrainian).

25. Resolution of the CCS of the Supreme Court of February 7, 2019 in case No. 332/1777/14-k URL: www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/80017586 (in Ukrainian).

26. Review of the judicial practice of the Criminal Court of Cassation as part of the Supreme Court regarding the provision of the right to defense in criminal proceedings (cases). Kyiv, 2019. 36 p. (in Ukrainian).

27. Resolution of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Ukraine dated May 24, 2018 in case No. 332/2781/15-k. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/74409389 (in Ukrainian).

28. Resolution of the CC of the Supreme Court of February 26, 2019 in case No. 734/117/15-k. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/80178614 (in Ukrainian).

29. Resolution of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Ukraine dated May 22, 2018 in case No. 740/1347/16-k. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/74440195 (in Ukrainian).

30. Resolution of the SC of the Supreme Court of February 12, 2019 in case No. 754/4282/16-k URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/79883009 (in Ukrainian).

31. Resolution of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Ukraine dated February 6, 2018 in case No. 752/11464/16-k. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/72150999 (in Ukrainian).

32. Resolution of the Supreme Court of Justice of Ukraine dated December 13, 2018 in case No. 760/17411/17. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/78627281 (in Ukrainian).

33. Resolution of the Central Committee of the Supreme Court dated June 20. 2019 in case No. 607/12579/17-k. URL: reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/82636244 (in Ukrainian).

34. Bairachna L.K., Bondar T.I. Judicial discretion as a tool for ensuring the justice of the judiciary. Carpathian Legal Bulletin. No. 6. 2021. pp. 22-27. URL pyuv.onua.edu.ua/index.php/pyuv/article/view/960 (in Ukrainian).

35. Decision of the ECHR in the case "Ushakov and Ushakova v. Ukraine" (Ushakov and Ushakova v. Ukraine) dated June 18, 2015, application No. 10705/12. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_a89#Text (in Ukrainian).

Download paper