THE PRINCIPLE OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PUBLICITY AS A GUARANTEE OF JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE

PDF

Nadiya DROZDOVICH, 

Assistant Judge of the Supreme Court of Ukraine,

Doctor of Law Sciences

THE PRINCIPLE OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PUBLICITY AS GUARANTEE OF JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE

 

The subject matter of the article is a principle of publicity in the criminal process of Ukraine. It is considered in terms of its importance for strengthening of judiciary credibility in the society by spreading the ideas of public and state interests protection. Theoretical definitions of the principle of criminal procedure publicity are introduced based on the studies of national scientists from the beginning of the 20 century. The article reviewed the matter of the term ‘public’ and its lexical meaning. On the basis of doctrinal analysis the conclusion about necessity of distinguishing between an absolute sense of publicity and publicity of criminal process is made. As opposed to legislative structure of publicity as a principle of criminal procedural activity in Article 25 of the Criminal Code of  Practice of Ukraine, such foundation is peculiar to all stages of  judicial procedure. In support of this principle guarantee and to affirm the independency of judicial activity there are references to extracts from Statement 1 (2001) Advisory Committee of European Judges on independency of judicial agencies and judges invariability dated 1 January 2001. The obligation to be trusted not only by parties of the case but society as well is particularly stressed. With this view an authorized judge in his course of duty is not only a civil officer but performs a state function by serving and being responsible to the law only. Therefore, awareness of judicial independency should be regarded as a duty to provide supremacy of the statute law by performing public functions. Taking into consideration scientific research results and international standards the necessity to balance private and public interests in judicial system organization is stressed with the aim to prevent arbitrary usage of authoritative powers.

Key words: publicity, the principle of publicity of criminal proceedings, powers, guarantee of judicial idependence, privat and public interests.

 

References

Opinion № 1 (2001) of the Advisory Council of European Judges on the standards of judicial independence and the immutability of judges of 1 January 2001. URL: http: // zakon2.rada.gov.ua/.[ukr.]

Cheltsov M. A. Criminal proceedings. M .: Jurid. ed., 1948. 624 p.[russ.]

Demidov I. F. Principles of the Soviet criminal process. Course of the Soviet criminal process: General part / ed. A. D. Boykov and I. I. Karpets. M .: Jurid. lit., 1989. 640 p.[russ.]

Soviet criminal trial / under the general editorship. Ph.D. M. I. Bazhanov and Dr. Y. M. Groshevoy. K .: Higher School Association, 1978. 472 p.[russ.]

Bashkatov L. N., Vetrova G. N., Dontsenko A. D., etc. Criminal proceedings. M .: NORMA-INFA-M, 2000. 352 p. [russ.]

Groshevy Y. M., Miroshnichenko T. M., Khomatov Y. V. and others. Criminal procedure of Ukraine: a textbook for law students. special higher educational institutions / ed. Y. M. Groshevy and V. M. Khotenets. Kharkiv: Pravo, 2000. 296 p.[ukr.]

Alexandrov A. S., Alexandrova I. A., Kruglov I.V. Appointment of criminal proceedings and punishment: a monograph. N. Novgorod, 2006. 111 p.[russ.]

Karabut L. V. Regarding the definition of the principle of publicity in criminal proceedings. Issues of combating crime: Coll. Science. works / ed. Col .: Y. V. Baulin (ed.) and others. Kharkiv: Crossroad, 2007. Issue. 13. p. 178–189.[russ.]

Malyarenko V. T. On publicity and dispositiveness in criminal proceedings of Ukraine and their significance. Bulletin of the Supreme Court of Ukraine. 2004. № 7. p. 2–11.[ukr.]

Bespalko I. L. System of principles of criminal procedure and the problem of their classification: monograph. Kharkiv: FINN, 2011. 216 p.[ukr.]

Stratonov V. M., Leonenko M. I. Public-private principles of construction and organization of criminal proceedings. Bulletin of the prosecutor's office. 2012. № 2. p. 87–91.[ukr.]