System and types of minority rights

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

Subject of the research. The article considers two levels in the mechanism of protection of human rights and freedoms: national and supranational. National includes both judicial and non-judicial methods of protection. The supranational level is represented by universal (global) and regional ways. The purpose of the research is to identify an effective mechanism for the protection of human rights that can replace the mechanism of protection provided by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, which has ceased to be valid for citizens of the Russian Federation. Research methods are the formal-legal method, analysis, synthesis, formallogical method.The main results. Theoretically, a particular citizen can use any of the national and supranational mechanisms for the protection of human rights. However, the nature of their action and the procedure for gaining access to these mechanisms are different, which affects their effectiveness and the readiness of a person to turn to one or another method of protection. Among supranational mechanisms, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 has a unique status: on the one hand, this document is “a symbol of the moral consensus of all states, the starting point for the creation of a modern human rights regime”; on the other hand, it is an act-declaration, the application of which in specific legal relations and the protection of human rights with its help are problematic. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 12/16/1966 provides for the establishment of a Human Rights Committee that exercises control over the provisions of the Covenant through a system of reports. Reports on measures taken to implement the rights provided for by the Covenant, as well as on non-fulfillment of their obligations under the Covenant by other States Parties, are submitted by States Parties. The mechanism of reports, however, is not reliable enough - there are states that ignore it.Regional Conventions are rightly considered the most effective means of protecting human rights. The implementation of the provisions of the Conventions is ensured by the activities of supranational judicial bodies, to which the applicant can file a complaint. The conditions for applying to such a court, its territorial proximity, the possibility of executing court decisions make this method of protection as accessible as possible. Among the national remedies, first of all, it should be noted the activity of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to protect the constitutional rights of citizens. The provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the Constitution of the Russian Federation in the section on human rights are almost identical, often written in the same phrases. But, despite the number of coincidences in the designation of human rights and freedoms, the main thing is not the designation (this is a declaration) of a specific right or freedom, but how they are applied and what is the practice of their protection (interpretation) by the Constitutional Court at the national level and the Convention on the supranational. It is here that the understanding of “identical” formulations can differ, and the question of who is better: a national or supranational body protects a particular human right, becomes debatable. It should also be remembered about the very meaning of supranational protection as an opportunity to receive protection from one's own state, albeit a subsidiary one. Therefore, it would be wrong to assume that in the absence of the possibility of applying to the ECHR, a citizen will be able to receive protection in the Constitutional Court without prejudice to the outcome of such protection.Considering that the protection of human rights is, first of all, the activity of national courts of first instance, consideration by the courts of administrative, civil and criminal cases, in cases where it is carried out in full compliance with the norms of procedural legislation, is able to fully ensure the protection of the rights and human freedoms. To do this, the courts have all the necessary tools, you just need the ability and desire to use them.Among the internal structures for monitoring the observance of human rights, a number of state and public bodies can be distinguished - the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation, the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights, the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, the police, the prosecutor's office and others. However, it is not possible to attribute them to the effective bodies for the protection of human rights.Conclusions. The existing national and supranational mechanisms for the protection of human rights, in their effectiveness, are not able to fully compensate for the loss of the opportunity for citizens of the Russian Federation to file a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights.

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 deals with the features of the European system of human rights protection. It has been established that the European system of human rights protection includes two main groups of international legal instruments: international legal acts (documents) and international bodies that protect these rights. In the first group, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and its Protocols are of paramount importance. The European Court of Human Rights is undoubtedly the main international body in the European system of human rights protection. The legal positions justified in ECtHR decisions are integral to the Convention and are important not only for the parties to the case, but also play a highest role in the formulation and development of human rights protection mechanisms.

The scientific article examines the theoretical and legal aspects of the rights of national minorities and indigenous peoples through the prism of political and legal thought, with a special emphasis on the concept of multiculturalism developed by V. Kymlicka. It is established that the rights of national communities occupy a special place in the system of human rights, as they combine individual and collective dimensions of legal status and reflect the historically formed need of societies to preserve cultural identity. It is found that the development of political and legal ideas regarding minority rights originates in the philosophical works of J.G. Herder, J.S. Mill, O. Bauer and other thinkers, who emphasized the importance of cultural diversity and the need to form mechanisms for its protection within the state. It is summarized that these concepts became the theoretical basis for further doctrinal approaches of the 20th century, for the development of provisions of international law regarding minority rights and the gradual recognition of collective rights as a component of the system of fundamental human rights. It is substantiated that the political and legal thought of V. Kymlicka is of decisive importance for the modern understanding of the rights of national minorities and indigenous peoples, since it integrated the categories of cultural autonomy, equality and democratic pluralism into the framework of the liberal theory of law. It emphasized that V. Kymlicka did not limit himself to stating the need for respect for cultural rights, but proposed a model of their institutional provision, which combines the recognition of the rights of communities with the preservation of general democratic standards. It is proved that his concept of multiculturalism became a qualitative shift in the theoretical and legal understanding of the legal status of minorities, as it laid the idea of their inseparability from the system of human rights, which was previously dominantly interpreted through the individualistic dimension. The article traces the evolution of political and legal ideas about the rights of minorities and indigenous peoples in the context of the development of the general theory of law, reveals the main patterns of their formation and finds out that the modern stage is characterized by a combination of globalization trends with the requirement to preserve cultural identity. In summary, the ideas of V. Kymlicka and his predecessors create a holistic theoretical and legal platform for further scientific research in the field of realizing the rights of national minorities and indigenous peoples, which has not only historical and doctrinal, but also practical significance for lawmaking and law enforcement in democratic states.

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 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 focuses on the role of legal acts of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in the criminal process of Ukraine. It analyses national and international regulatory and legal acts as well as highlights the standpoints of scholars, which resulted in defining the need to use the term “the practice of the European Court of Human Rights” aiming to describe the legal acts of the ECHR as a source of Ukrainian criminal procedural law. The article gives ground to the statement that the court order issued by the ECHR which reveals the fact of Ukraine violating international obligations (norms of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) in court’s resolution of a case, that have entered into force, have a dualistic legal nature: on the one hand, it is a legal act, which provides grounds for reviewing the criminal case in exceptional circumstances, and on the other hand, is a part of the practice of the ECHR. The author makes a conclusion that the role of the practice of the ECHR in the Ukrainian criminal process is to ensure the rule of law and lawfulness in the criminal procedure by means of applying the practice of the ECHR as a source of law. The role of court orders issued by the ECHR, which establish the fact of Ukraine violating international obligations (norms of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) in court’s resolution of a case that have entered into force, is viewed in initiating a mechanism to ensure proper and effective protection of human rights and freedoms in the criminal case.

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.

Today, the United Nations plays a leading role in the development of international law and cooperation among the world's states. Member states have pledged to realize their rights and fulfill their obligations under the UN Charter. The main objectives of the UN are envisaged in Article 1 of the Charter, where the key provision relating to human rights is reflected in paragraph 3 of Article 1. According to it, the UN aims to achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural and humanitarian character and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction of race, sex, language or religion [1]. As it can be seen, the Charter only calls on states parties to promote the protection of human rights, without establishing clear obligations to protect and guarantee them. Since 2014, i.e. since Russia launched its war against Ukraine, the aggressor has not stopped committing crimes against our country and our people. Russia's actions encroach not only on the sovereignty of our state, but also on human rights and freedoms. Under such circumstances, the international community cannot stand aside from these events. Many international human rights organizations have offices in Ukraine. Among them is the UN. On 31.07.2014, the Government of Ukraine and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights signed an agreement on the deployment of a short-term UN human rights monitoring mission in Ukraine. The legal status of UN monitoring missions in legal science has not been the subject of a separate study. Certain aspects of the activities and competence of such missions have been considered in the works of such scholars as I.A. Shumilo [14], F. Megre [13], K. Boyle [12] and others, which are devoted to the coverage of international mechanisms for the protection of human rights and freedoms, the status of the UN General Assembly and the UN Human Rights Council. Therefore, the task set out in this article is to analyze and establish the specifics of the legal status of the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission (hereinafter - the Mission), in particular, the one established for Ukraine, and the limits of the Mission's powers under the UN Charter, UN General Assembly resolutions, and international agreements between UN agencies and Ukraine. Therefore, the relevance of this article is beyond doubt. It has been established that the purpose of the Mission is to facilitate cooperation between the Government of Ukraine and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (hereinafter - OHCHR)[2] and it plays the role of a subsidiary mechanism for the protection of human rights and freedoms within the UN. The conclusions of the mission will undoubtedly serve as a convincing additional evidence base for Ukraine in international judicial and other bodies in protecting its interests and establishing the guilt of the Russian Federation for actions committed against our country.

This article is devoted to clarify the significance of the advisory opinions of the European Court of Human Rights as a recently improved institution. Thus, according to Article 1 of Protocol No. 16 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the highest judicial institutions of the High Contracting Party, as defined in accordance with Art. 10 may apply to the Court for advisory opinions on matters of principle concerning the interpretation or application of the rights and freedoms defined by the Convention or its protocols. Considering the fact that only two advisory opinions on the appeal of the member states of the Council of Europe have been published on the official website of the court, this topic is a new subject for research and requires a systematic study. Allowing states to seek advisory opinions was driven by the need to ease the burden on the European Court of Human Rights. However, given the novelty of the improved institute, this statement is still controversial. The article offers its own conclusions regarding the significance of the advisory opinions in the activities of the European Court, provides a view on the legal nature of this legal institution in the internal legal order of Ukraine. This was achieved by defining the essence of such a mechanism, analyzing primary sources from the official website of the court, statistical data on the functioning of the institution, and generalizing national legislation to determine the legal nature. Thus, although Ukraine has ratified Protocol No. 16, however, the legal status of such advisory opinions has not been determined. In this connection, it is proposed to amend a number of legislative acts, in particular, to article 17 of the Law of Ukraine "On the implementation and application of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights", which should be supplemented with the rule on the legal force of the advisory opinion of the European Court of Human Rights. According to the general importance of such an institution, it seems reasonable to hope for a decrease in the number of decisions that would contradict the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, and, accordingly, a decrease in the grounds for filing applications.

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 accession of the European Union to the European Convention on Human Rights raises questions about the autonomy of EU law, and about the future relationship between the EU Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. The concept of autonomy appears to confirm prevailing theories about the relationships between legal systems in Europe, ie legal and constitutional pluralism. This study challenges those theories, and proposes an alternative paradigm: the integration of laws. Its central argument is that the EU system of human rights protection is increasingly characterized by its integration with the national constitutional laws of the Member States and with the ECHR. It argues that in integrated legal systems, conflicts between supreme adjudicators can be resolved from within the law. Each of the supreme/constitutional courts needs to recognize the limits of its jurisdiction, but is also sharing jurisdiction with the others. This principle of limited and shared jurisdiction is a tool for resolving conflicts, leading away from a conception of a deep conflict of supreme judicial authority. Integrated legal systems are governed by a law of integration, which is there for all to see. The article touches upon some of the elements of that law of integration. It goes on to investigate the scope for EU law autonomy — which is in essence concerned with safeguarding the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice — in connection with accession to the ECHR. It argues that the principle of limited and shared jurisdiction should govern the relationship between the two European courts, and that it is capable of ensuring that the European Court of Human Rights does not decide matters of EU competence, or EU law generally. But the principle also means that the Court of Justice will be bound by judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.

The article examines the issue of protection of public morality of modern Ukrainian legislation and the direction of resolving this issue in the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. The urgency of the issue of moral protection is undeniable, because any offence, crime or action that harms others is an immoral phenomenon. The protection of morality, therefore, aims to prevent illegal human activities and criminal acts in the future. The decisions of the European Court of Human Rights are aimed at achieving this goal, which is dictated by humanistic tendencies and social and legal progress. However, the protection of public morality under current Ukrainian legislation does not fully meet this goal of the European Community. The relevant law of Ukraine "On Protection of Public Morality" specifies only some legal bases of protection of society from the distribution of products that may adversely affect public morality, leaving all other issues of morality aside. This leads to such negative consequences as disrespect for the elderly, careless attitude to family responsibilities, degradation of personality, etc., because it is morality that originally exists in society, defining the essence of human nature, which exists in contrast to the animal world. The article analyzes the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and finds that the issue of legal protection of public and personal morality can be divided into two areas: protection of personal morality in the moral interests of society and protection of morality recognized in society and currently valid. . An analysis of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights has given grounds to assert that the European Community searches for justice by combining the interests of society and the needs of the individual. The Court recognizes moral and fair interference in a person's private life if such interference: meets an urgent need and a social need; meets the condition of "the need for such intervention in a democratic society"; is proportional to the legitimate aim; directly provided by law within the meaning of Art. 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The following are recognized by the European Court of Human Rights as illegal and immoral: systematic storage and use by public authorities of information about a person's private life; use of information relating to a person's distant past.

У статті досліджено окремі аспекти застосування практики Європейського Суду з прав людин и під час здійснення правосуддя в кримінальних провадженнях щодо корупційних злочинів. Проаналізовано сучасні думки науковців щодо застосування практики Європейського Суду з прав людини під час здійснення правосуддя в кримінальних провадженнях щодо корупційних злочинів. Досліджено авторські наукові підходи, які обґрунтовують висновок про те, що використання практики ЄСПЛ у кримінальному су-дочинстві України є обов’язковим. Визначено, що застосування практики Європейського Суду з прав людини під час здійснення правосуддя в кримінальних провадженнях щодо корупційних злочинів прямо передбачено ч. 2 ст. 8 КПК України. Також доведено, що використання практики ЄСПЛ вітчизняними судами під час здійснення правосуддя в кримінальних провадженнях щодо корупційних злочинів як мотивація виправдувальних вироків не завжди пов’язана з урахуванням практики ЄСПЛ щодо провокації вчинення злочину, а також засновується на використанні доктрини «плодів отруйного дерева» та «розумного сумніву».