ОКРЕМІ АСПЕКТИ ЗАСТОСУВАННЯ ПРАКТИКИ ЄВРОПЕЙСЬКОГО СУДУ З ПРАВ ЛЮДИНИ ПІД ЧАС ЗДІЙСНЕННЯ ПРАВОСУДДЯ В КРИМІНАЛЬНИХ ПРОВАДЖЕННЯХ ЩОДО КОРУПЦІЙНИХ ЗЛОЧИНІВ

The study aimed to analyse how the Ukrainian legal system implements the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, as well as to identify problems and prospects for improving this process. The article used methods of legal analysis of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, comparison of national legislation with the European Convention on Human Rights, analysis of the statistics of the European Court of Human Rights, research on the implementation of European Court of Human Rights decisions at the national level, hermeneutics to identify terminological gaps, analysis of the implementation of European standards in the national legal system, and deduction to identify key issues in cases against Ukraine. An analysis of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights revealed numerous systemic human rights violations in Ukraine, particularly in the areas of conditions of detention, unlawful arrests and lengthy court proceedings. Problems with non-enforcement of court decisions and violations of the rights to liberty and dignity have been confirmed by numerous cases, such as Gongadze v. Ukraine and Kharchenko v. Ukraine. Amendments to the Criminal Code of Ukraine following the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, in particular the limitation of the term of pre-trial detention, have reduced the number of cases of prolonged detention The study aimed to analyse how the Ukrainian legal system implements the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, as well as to identify problems and prospects for improving this process. The article used methods of legal analysis of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, comparison of national legislation with the European Convention on Human Rights, analysis of the statistics of the European Court of Human Rights, research on the implementation of European Court of Human Rights decisions at the national level, hermeneutics to identify terminological gaps, analysis of the implementation of European standards in the national legal system, and deduction to identify key issues in cases against Ukraine. An analysis of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights revealed numerous systemic human rights violations in Ukraine, particularly in the areas of conditions of detention, unlawful arrests and lengthy court proceedings. Problems with non-enforcement of court decisions and violations of the rights to liberty and dignity have been confirmed by numerous cases, such as Gongadze v. Ukraine and Kharchenko v. Ukraine. Amendments to the Criminal Code of Ukraine following the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, in particular the limitation of the term of pre-trial detention, have reduced the number of cases of prolonged detention

The author has studied the issue of the origin and formation of the European Court of Human Rights after the Second World War, steps in the establishment and development of this Court, as well as the actions of the Member States to consolidate the development of the European Court of Human Rights at specialized conferences with the support of the Committee of Ministers. The list of regulatory and legislative acts adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine for the establishment of the rule of law in regard to the understanding of human rights in the activities of Ukrainian courts has been researched. Since the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms has become part of national legislation after its ratification by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, more detailed study should be conducted regarding the urgent task of fully understanding the content of this international treaty and the main mechanisms for implementing its norms. The author has analyzed the implementation of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the example of its specific decisions into criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine by applying the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights by the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court in its activities and problematic aspects of their practical implementation. Particular attention has been paid to the study of problematic aspects of the use of these decisions in practice by highlighting the rulings of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court issued in 2019. The author has analyzed the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in regard to the conducted secret (search) actions by law enforcement agencies with further disclosure ob obtained evidence to the defense party; it has been also pointed out that the right to disclose evidence contained in criminal proceedings is not absolute to the defense and may be limited only in cases when there are the interests of national security, information protection or witness protection concerning the methods and forms of law enforcement agencies’ activity. The author has made propositions to resolve certain situations related to the implementation of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in Ukraine.

The article is devoted to a comprehensive analysis of the problems of ensuring proper medical care for persons deprived of liberty through the prism of international human rights protection standards and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. It is substantiated that the quality and accessibility of medical care in penitentiary institutions constitute one of the key indicators of adherence to the rule of law, respect for human dignity, and the effectiveness of the state human rights protection system. Particular emphasis is placed on the heightened vulnerability of persons held in places of detention, given their complete dependence on state institutions in matters of health care. Based on an analysis of the judgments of the ECtHR, in particular in cases against Ukraine, the main criteria of “adequate medical care” in conditions of deprivation of liberty are identified. These include timely access to a physician, proper diagnosis, continuity and effectiveness of treatment, as well as the compatibility of detention conditions with prisoners’ medical needs. It is demonstrated that the formal provision of medical procedures without achieving a real clinical outcome does not meet the standards of Article 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The article analyzes Ukrainian national legislation in the field of medical care for convicted persons and establishes that, despite its formal compliance with international standards, the practice of its implementation remains problematic. Systemic shortcomings of penitentiary medicine are identified, including the institutional dependence of medical staff on prison administrations, insufficient funding and shortages of specialized personnel, outdated material and technical resources, and the ineffectiveness of national legal remedies. On the basis of generalizing the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and international recommendations, the article proposes key directions for improving the system of medical care for persons deprived of liberty. These include completing the integration of penitentiary medicine into the civilian health care system, ensuring the genuine implementation of the principle of equivalence of medical care, strengthening guarantees of the professional independence of physicians, and enhancing the role of judicial and non-judicial oversight. It is concluded that the implementation of these measures is a necessary condition for fulfilling Ukraine’s international obligations and reducing the number of human rights violations in places of detention. Keywords: medical care, penal institutions, human rights, deprivation of liberty, European Court of Human Rights, penitentiary medicine, health care, vulnerable groups, mental health, continuity of care, legal protection mechanisms, international standards, penitentiary system reform.

In international human rights law, the notion of due diligence concerns a qualifier of behaviour to realize human rights protection, including the protection against non-state actor interferences. However, the question remains what due diligence obligations of states in the context of non-state actor interferences exactly entail in international human rights law. The present article aims to address this matter by comparing case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) with that of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR). Using a working model of due diligence that has been introduced in recent scholarly work, this article further explores this model and attempts to give further meaning to its two paradigms: ‘regulation’ and ‘risk management’. In that way, it maps out the relevant elements of this foundational concept that lies at the heart of human rights protection.

Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights sets out the guarantees of the right to liberty and security. During criminal proceedings, this fundamental human right may be subject to restriction. Therefore, both legislation and law enforcement practice must ensure fair procedures for such restrictions. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive analysis, systematisation, and explanation of the Convention standards that guarantee the lawfulness of restrictions on the right to liberty and security within criminal proceedings. It also aimed to identify the grounds for the application of custodial preventive measures, thereby helping to avoid errors in legal practice and contributing to the development of a uniform and consistent investigative and judicial approach, including under conditions of martial law. The principal methods of inquiry include axiological, formal-legal, logical-legal, systemic-structural, comparative-legal analysis, and generalisation. These methods have made it possible to describe the results and substantiate the conclusions reached. The study was conducted concerning the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the national criminal procedural legislation. It has been established that, according to the standards developed in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the threshold for suspicion does not require the same degree of certainty as a formal charge. A reasonable suspicion implies the existence of sufficient factual information that would enable an external observer (the investigating judge) to conclude, with a high degree of probability, that the individual whose right to liberty and security is to be restricted has committed the alleged offence. It was argued that the European Court of Human Rights adheres to a substantive rather than a formal conception of a charge. Based on an analysis of the legal regulation of the grounds for applying preventive measures, it has been demonstrated that the investigating judge will, in each specific case, determine whether the factual data are sufficient to establish a reasonable suspicion and whether the associated risks are justified. The practical value of this study lies in the possibility of applying the established standards of the European Court of Human Rights when deciding on the imposition of custodial preventive measures. This would help ensure uniformity in legal practice and promote the rule of law in Ukraine

Guaranteed by the Constitution of Ukraine and Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, the right to respect for private and family life for those sentenced to life imprisonment, in terms of its implementation and scope, differs from this right for free individuals. But it is undeniable that those sentenced to life imprisonment are not deprived of this right in full. This is consistently emphasized in its practice by the European Court of Human Rights. In addition to private and family life being a natural need of every individual, its realization, particularly in forms such as maintaining and supporting connections with the outside world, is a means of re-socialization for individuals undergoing punishment in the form of life imprisonment. The benchmark for the development of Ukrainian legislation and law enforcement practice is the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. Therefore, the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the right to respect for private and family life for those sentenced to life imprisonment should be studied and generalized. The precondition for the further development of any scientific direction is the comprehension of what has already been done by previous researchers. The conducted research has shown that Ukrainian scientific literature has addressed the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights regarding various aspects of the right to respect for the private and family life of prisoners, broadly understood (including those in custody, sentenced to a certain term of imprisonment, and those sentenced to life imprisonment): 1) the conclusion that the restriction of the right to respect for private and family life for persons deprived of liberty, provided it is lawful, is not incompatible with the Convention; 2) the conditions/criteria for the legality of such restriction, implemented by national authorities; 3) the systematic identification of the main types of violations of the right to respect for family life recorded in the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights regarding convicted persons and persons in custody; 4) special protection of correspondence between an inmate and their lawyer; 5) differentiation of the spheres of application of Article 8 with other articles of the Convention, primarily Article 3; 6) determination of the main trend in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights «in the penitentiary sphere and in the criminal justice system as a whole,» which consists of constantly raising the standards of human rights by the Court; 7) ignoring the need for an individual approach in applying restrictions on the rights of persons deprived of liberty. The analysis of the existing body of scientific literature shows that existing studies are mainly based on the analysis of the European Court of Human Rights practice regarding foreign states and, with one exception, do not distinguish the legal status of those sentenced to life imprisonment among other deprived individuals. Since the publication of the analyzed monographs, 9–10 years have passed. During this time, the European Court of Human Rights has developed a significant body of practice regarding Ukraine, taking into account the Ukrainian context. Therefore, the analysis of the European Court of Human Rights decisions specifically regarding Ukraine should be a priority. Additionally, they should be analyzed in full. Such an analysis will allow, in conjunction with demonstrating the Convention’s standards regarding the right of those sentenced to life imprisonment to respect for their private and family life, to show the systematic and partial problems in this area identified by the European Court of Human Rights in its practice regarding Ukraine.

Przedmiot badań: Prezentowane opracowanie dotyczy użycia siły fizycznej przez Policję w świetle przepisów ustawy z dnia 24 maja 2013 r. o środkach przymusu bezpośredniego i broni palnej. Ten środek przymusu bezpośredniego może być bardzo skuteczny. Niekiedy jest wręcz niezbędny podczas interwencji policyjnych. W przypadku bezpodstawnego bądź nieadekwatnego zastosowania może on jednak prowadzić do naruszenia wolności i praw osób, wobec których jest używany. W praktyce pojawiają się przypadki przekroczenia granic stosowania siły fizycznej. Niniejsze opracowanie stanowi analizę przepisów wymienionej wyżej ustawy oraz orzecznictwa Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka w zakresie dopuszczalności użycia siły fizycznej przez Policję. Cel badawczy: W artykule podjęto próbę odpowiedzi na pytanie, czy rozwiązania prawne zawarte w ustawie o środkach przymusu bezpośredniego i broni palnej i dotyczące użycia siły fizycznej są wystarczające, a jeżeli nie, to dlaczego i czy istnieją zasady, które ułatwiłyby policjantom korzystanie z tego środka w granicach prawa oraz czy mogą temu służyć standardy wypracowane przez Europejski Trybunał Praw Człowieka. Metoda badawcza: Badania opierają się na dogmatyczno-prawnej analizie przepisów ustawy z dnia 24 maja 2013 r. o środkach przymusu bezpośredniego i broni palnej oraz wypowiedzi doktryny i orzecznictwa Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka. Wyniki: Przepisy ustawy o środkach przymusu bezpośredniego i broni palnej oraz dotychczasowe analizy dotyczące stosowania siły fizycznej nie są rozległe i są niewystarczające do określenia standardów jej używania przez Policję. Brak jest wytycznych, które ułatwiłyby policjantom przestrzeganie granic działania przy użyciu siły fizycznej. Pewną pomoc w tym zakresie mogą stanowić zasady wypracowane przez Europejski Trybunał Praw Człowieka.

The article analyzes the condition for acceptability of individual applications to the European Court of Human Rights, which was introduced by The Protocol No. 14 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the substantial damage to which the applicant suffered as well as the circumstances that introduce the reservation of paragraphs B clause 3 of the Art. 35 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and their qualification features.It has been found that the European Court of Human Rights, even assuming that the applicant did not suffer material damage cannot declare as inadmissible any individual claim that raises the question: the adoption of law, interpretation of the norms of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, national right. It has been established that the respect for human rights, even if there is a presumption that the applicant did not suffer material damage, requires announcement as an admissible by the European Court of Human Rights such an individual application, since it has raised issues of a general nature regarding the observance of the norms of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms: 1) the necessity to clarify the obligations of the State under the Convention; 2) to compel the respondent State to resolve a structural problem affecting the interests of other persons in the same position as the applicant. The following conditions have been identified in the presence of which respect for human rights does not require consideration of the statement by the European Court of Human Rights: 1) the relevant national legislation and practice changed, and similar issues had already been resolved in other cases that the European Court of Human Rights reviewed; 2) the relevant law was canceled and the statement had only a historical character; 3) The European Court of Human Rights or the Council of Ministers have already considered this issue as a complex issue

The so-called Salduz doctrine that concerns the right to a fair trial and the right to the defense attorney emerged from the case of Salduz v. Turkey, decided on the part of the European Court of Human Rights where the Grand Chamber found the violation of Article 6, paragraph 3(c) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. In this connection, the aim of this paper is twofold. In the first place, the paper aims to demonstrate how the European Court of Human Rights has overturned the two main tenents of the so-called Salduz doctrine derived from its landmark case of Salduz v. Turkey in its later Judgments delivered in the case of Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom and the case of Beuze v. Belgium. The two tenets derived from the Salduz doctrine being examined in the paper are the right to access to the defense attorney as a rule during pre-trial proceedings and the absolute exclusionary rule. In the second place, the paper aims to offer a critique of the standard of compelling reasons employed in the Ibrahim Judgment. In order to achieve its aim, this paper primarily analyses the jurisprudence of the European Human Court of Human Rights in the cases of Salduz v. Turkey, Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom, and Beuze v. Belgium. Besides, the paper also touches upon other judgments of the European Court of Human Rights related to its subject. The paper in question, therefore, primarily relies on the case-law method in achieving its aims. The paper concludes that in overturning the Salduz doctrine in relation to aspects examined in the paper, the European Court of Human Rights has exacerbated the legal standing of the person against whom criminal proceedings are being conducted.

The article examines the progress towards equality in the practice of the ECtHR and its significant impact on the partnership agreement in de facto alliances. It has been established that over the last thirty-five years, the approaches of the European Court of Human Rights to the issue of the right of same-sex partners to family life and its formal recognition have undergone significant changes. It was found that the issue of discrimination was the subject of a number of cases concerning various rights of homosexual unions.
 It is substantiated that in the aspect of the right to formal recognition of same-sex partnerships by the state, the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the case “Oliari and others v. Italy ». It was found that despite many years of case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the provisions of Council Regulation № 2016/1104, not all EU countries have provided legal certainty for same-sex couples, even in the form of civil partnerships (namely, Slovakia, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Latvia and Lithuania).
 The French experience of regulating the procedure for concluding, essential conditions of a partnership agreement, as well as the procedure for its termination is studied.
 It is substantiated that taking into account the European integration processes in Ukraine, reforming its private law according to European standards, our state, given the principle of equality and positive obligations under Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms should guarantee partners in de facto unions sex legal certainty. In our opinion, it is optimal to amend the Central Committee of Ukraine and grant the right to conclude civil partnership agreements to persons regardless of the article. At the same time, the IC of Ukraine must maintain a heteronomous approach, ie guarantee the right to marry persons of the opposite sex, which fully complies with Art. 12 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
 Given that a partnership agreement can be an effective legal regulator of relations between individuals in de facto unions, it is worth borrowing the positive experience of France in improving Ukrainian legislation.

The subject of this study is the right to respect for family life in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. Today, this right plays a significant role, primarily due to the paramount position of the family in society. It is addressed both by the norms of domestic law (Articles 18 and 47 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland) and by international law (Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights). In the present era — a time of significant social change — the obligation to respect family life constitutes one of the major challenges. In addition to the traditional model of the family, contemporary society is shaped by other forms of interpersonal relationships, based on emotional, economic, and other types of bonds. This raises the question of whether persons in such alternative relationships also create a “family life” and, consequently, whether they are entitled to the right to respect for family life. The rich body of case law of the European Court of Human Rights, concerning the interpretation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which addresses the right to respect for family life, is helpful in resolving these doubts. The aim of this study is to analyse the concepts of “family,” “family life,” and “respect for family life” in the context of international law, as well as the scope of the right to respect for family life in the case law of the ECtHR. The content of the publication is based primarily on the extensive jurisprudence of the ECtHR.

It is indicated that proper protection of fundamental human rights is a key criterion for the existence of a true legal state. Coverage of the functioning of the European Court of Human Rights is becoming increasingly widespread in the information space. The significance of this institution not only does not decrease over time, but also increases. Today, the ECHR has become an effective mechanism of legal protection for those citizens who have exhausted the possibilities of achieving justice within the national legal system. The article examines the impact of the ECtHR decisions on the protection of human rights through the prism of modern challenges and threats. It is noted that the imperfection of the national judicial system is an obvious fact. At the same time, Ukraine is among the five countries with the largest number of applications to the European Court of Human Rights. It is emphasized that the fact that more and more people are applying to the European Court of Human Rights indicates that it is an effective mechanism for protecting their rights and freedoms. However, the ECtHR is a supranational mechanism for the protection of human rights: its capabilities are limited by its powers, the breadth of which is determined taking into account respect for the sovereignty of the member states that have voluntarily undertaken to implement the decisions of the Court to which they are parties. The effectiveness of the legal protection mechanism established by the European Convention on Human Rights depends not only on the efficiency of the Court’s work, but also on how conscientiously states implement its decisions. And only the combination of these two factors has the effect of ensuring human rights and fundamental freedoms stipulated by the Convention. It is concluded that in the context of adapting Ukrainian legislation to EU legislation, ensuring social human rights (the right to a decent standard of living and social development), political rights (compliance with international electoral standards, the right to association), and protecting human rights are the key to stable partnership relations with EU member states. Ukraine needs to continue to make considerable efforts to ensure the effectiveness of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, to create new effective national remedies for its violations, and to adapt national legislation to European standards. That is, the most effective and direct protection of human rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention should be ensured at the national level.

The article focuses on the principle of impartiality and independence of judiciary as a part of the right to a fair trial according to Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. In particular, an account will be taken of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in matters of applications from national judges. The article considers the reflection of the decision of the European Court of Human Rights on the amendment of national legislations and the amendment of the provisions of the national constitutions regarding the principles of justice.

The scientific work focuses on reviewing the works of scholars who have studied various aspects of the implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. However, the issues of human rights protection and observance of the principle of competition during the consideration of an administrative offence case remain unaddressed. A scientific analysis has been made of the positions of the European Court of Human Rights with regard to the protection of fundamental human rights in proceedings on administrative offences, and the involvement of the prosecutor in the proceedings with a view to ensuring that the parties are competitive and that the prosecutor fulfils his/her main purpose under administrative law, which is to supervise compliance with and correct application of the provisions of current legislation. It has been proved that as a result of amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine, it was excluded Section VII “Prosecution” and was supplemented Section VIII “Justice” with a new Article 131-1. Therefore, under the new Ukrainian constitutional legal order, the prosecutor’s office as an institution performing the function of criminal prosecution is structurally integrated into the general system of justice. Considering that the place and role of the prosecutor's office is defined in the title of Section VIII of the Constitution of Ukraine “Justice”, this indicates that the special status of the prosecutor’s office in the constitutional system of power is enshrined, and that there is a functional link between the court and the prosecutor’s office, which forms the legal basis of the prosecutor’s office and directly affects the practical activities of the prosecutor's office as an institution of public power. Based on the review of law enforcement practice, it has been noted that there is a need to revise the approach to administrative cases (under Article 130 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offences) in the context of the European Court of Human Rights case law. It has been proposed to amend and supplement the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offences with provisions on the protection of fundamental rights of persons involved in administrative proceedings and to establish the appropriate procedural role of the prosecutor in the administrative process.

The article is devoted to determining the peculiarities of application of various types of measures in the mechanism of execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in Ukraine.Based on the analysis of international legal acts, provisions of Ukrainian legislation and case law, the author describes the procedure for applying individual measures and general measures in the process of enforcement of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in Ukraine. The author distinguishes the difference between the procedure for enforcement of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and the procedure for enforcement of judgments of foreign courts or international commercial arbitrations in Ukraine.It is argued that the viewpoint in the scientific literature that judicial review is not the main means of individual influence in the mechanism of enforcement of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights does not in any way negate its importance in situations where restitutio in integrum is possible only in this way.The author concludes that measures to enforce a judgment of the European Court of Human Rights are comprehensive in nature and are aimed at the fullest possible restoration of the violated right, elimination of the negative consequences of such a violation and prevention of similar violations in the future.The . The author concludes that individual measures are best suited to a particular legal situation. They are implemented both by virtue of the direct effect of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights on the territory of Ukraine (in terms of payment of compensation to the victim) and by adopting decisions of state authorities based on the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in accordance with the established procedure. For example, by reviewing decisions of national courts in exceptional circumstances.The author concludes that general measures have a systemic impact on the legal system of the State, serve the purpose of bringing national legislation closer to European standards and have a preventive effect on preventing future violations of the rights protected by the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, not only in respect of the person in whose favour the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights was delivered, but also in respect of any other citizens of the relevant State.