BUILDING A COMPULSORY MEDIATION PATHWAY: BULGARIA AS A LIVE EXPERIMENT IN DISPUTE SYSTEM DESIGN ?

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 article is devoted to outlining the place of the Commissioner for the European Court of Human Rights in the mechanism of execution of the judgments of this judicial institution as governed by the legislation of Ukraine. The significance of the study stems from the urgent need for a thorough and comprehensive research of the legislative basis of the activities of the Commissioner for the European Court of Human Rights in this direction due to its obsolescence and non-compliance with the quality standards of legal regulation. For this, in particular, the very role of the Commissioner for the European Court of Human Rights in the process of implementing the judgments of the latter needs to be properly understood. According to the results of the research, it is substantiated that the Commissioner for the European Court of Human Rights: (1) coordinates the implementation by the state executive service and the state treasury of the formalities necessary for the payment of compensation for the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights; (2) represents the state in court, claiming damages from public officials caused as a result of their improper performance of their official duties, which led to a judgment of the European Court of Human Rights against Ukraine and the payment of just satisfaction to the injured person; (3) informs persons in whose favor a judgment of the European Court of Human Rights has been delivered about ways to restore their rights and fundamental freedoms, including additional individual measures, as well as bringing information about these measures to the attention of government authorities, which are responsible for the implementation of these measures; (4) monitors the implementation of relevant measures by these government authorities; (5) advises these government authorities in the process of implementing a judgment of the European Court of Human Rights. Attention is drawn to the fact that the issues of legal regulation of the activities of the Commissioner for the European Court of Human Rights in these areas include, in particular: (a) mutual exclusivity of legislative provisions on the timeframe for filing a compensatory claim for damages caused by just satisfaction payments; (b) non-correspondence between procedures for imposing responsibility for these damages established by the Law of Ukraine ‘On Execution of Judgments and Application of the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights’ and the Law of Ukraine ‘On Civil Service’; (c) the general obsolescence of the order of interaction between the state executive service and the Commissioner for the European Court of Human Rights; (d) limitation of the control toolkit of the Commissioner for the European Court of Human Rights.

Background: The general development of mediation in Europe has been inspired by a number of Council of Europe recommendations and strongly supported by the European Union. However, clear rules with respect to mandatory mediation have never been established, leaving it to national legislators to decide whether and in what form mandatory mediation may be introduced. This has sparked public debate over the last two decades in several Member States that have introduced mandatory mediation as a measure to foster mediation. While some Member States, like Italy and Lithuania, have already introduced specific models of mandatory mediation, others, like Romania and Bulgaria, continue to express doubts about the coexistence of mandatory mediation and the effective right to justice. This article aims to compare international and national approaches towards mandatory mediation, seeking to identify guidelines for national legislators planning to introduce mandatory mediation models. Methods: The primary methods used in preparing this article combined systematic analysis of the scientific literature related to various forms and models of mandatory mediation with a doctrinal analysis of supranational legal regulation in the field of mandatory mediation. This was complemented by a thematic review of key judgments from the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights. The research was further enriched by an examination of the legal frameworks and constitutional case law of a few selected countries: Italy, Romania and Bulgaria. This approach involved mapping the examined sources according to their hierarchy—starting with binding EU-level instruments, followed by recommendatory ones, and moving vertically down to domestic statutes and relevant case law. The source selection criteria established at the outset of the research included whether the respective legal source explicitly referenced mandatory mediation and relied on Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Additionally, a qualitative content analysis was conducted on significant national constitutional case law from Italy, Romania and Bulgaria to identify a possible list of criteria for constitutionally unchallengeable mandatory mediation models that could be adopted by countries seeking new effective ways to foster mediation. Results and conclusions: The research identified common concerns regarding the introduction of mandatory mediation and proposed a set of criteria to ensure a balance between the mandate to mediate and the right to access to justice. It was concluded that, when narrowly tailored and supported by robust safeguards, mandatory or quasi-mandatory mediation can reduce court congestion and encourage earlier settlement without undermining fundamental procedural rights. The overarching European framework already provides adequate human-rights guidance; however, the remaining implementation gap lies in national design choices concerning exemptions, cost allocation, and mediator accreditation. Embedding an automatic yet non-binding first session, guaranteeing legal-aid coverage and interpreter services, aligning mediator-quality rules, and tracking compliance through digital case-management tools would make it less likely that mediation degenerates into a mere box-ticking exercise. Future research should observe the durability of settlements and overall user satisfaction to ensure that efficiency gains do not erode meaningful access to justice.

This article examines the influence of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights on the development of the civil procedural law of Ukraine and the practice of applying its norms by domestic courts. The concept and essence of the precedent nature of decisions (decisions) of the European Court of Human Rights, their place in the system of so-called "judicial sources" of civil procedural law are defined. The shortcomings of the Law of Ukraine "On the implementation of decisions and application of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights" are indicated, which recognizes the practice of the European Court of Human Rights as a source of law and the position of domestic courts regarding this deficiency.
 It is noted that the source of law according to the Law of Ukraine "On the Execution of Decisions and Application of the Practice of the European Court of Human Rights" is also the practice of the European Commission on Human Rights and its role in the procedure for considering complaints about violations of the Convention is determined.
 The directions of the influence of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights on civil proceedings are outlined, where it is concluded that a precedent can be formed on any procedural issue due to the dynamic interpretation by the specified court of the provisions of the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 and its protocols . It is noted that the practice of the European Court of Human Rights generally constructs legal ideas regarding the principles of civil procedure and the right to a fair trial. On the example of a separate decision of the European Court of Human Rights, the law enforcement and regulatory influence on the results of consideration and resolution of a civil case and the development of the civil procedural law of Ukraine, respectively, are analyzed. The importance of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights for the civil justice of Ukraine is summarized. In particular, taking into account the precedent practice of the ECtHR during the consideration and resolution of civil cases will eliminate the factors that serve as the reason for the appeal to the Court and will introduce European standards of protection of human rights and freedoms into Ukrainian civil proceedings. As a result, the impact of the decisions of the ECtHR will reduce the need to appeal to an international judicial institution in search of just satisfaction, which will accelerate the protection of the rights and freedoms of the parties to a civil case within the framework of national judicial jurisdiction.

The urgency of the issue of human rights implementation is determined by its permanent nature. Human rights ensuring has become not only a moral imperative, but also a key indicator of the countries' development and their readiness to cooperate in the international arena. Human rights implementation is an important component of any democratic society. The level of freedom and justice within society depends on how efficiency human rights are implemented. The European Court of Human Rights activity, the practice of which is recognized as a source of national law, is of particular importance. The purpose of the study is to cover the practice of the European Court of Human Rights as a factor in improving the human rights provision in Ukraine. It is emphasized that the practice of the European Court of Human Rights is considered as having a precedent nature, although the system of decisions of the Strasbourg Court does not have formal features characteristic of "classical” precedent law. It is indicated that the European Court of Human Rights practice can influence national law in several ways: the use of legal provisions formulated by the European Court of Human Rights by national courts; interpretation by national public authorities of the norms of national legislation through legal provisions formulated by the European Court of Human Rights; amending national legislation in accordance with the practice of the European Court of Human Rights; development of the human rights doctrine. It is emphasized that the decisions of the Court are binding for all member states, parties to the Convention. Therefore, national judicial authorities are also obliged to apply the legal provisions set forth in the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in cases where they concern the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. It is summarized that the European Court of Human Rights practice is a crucial factor in the development of domestic law, contributing to the improvement of the human rights implementation. The practice of the European Court of Human Rights influences the formation and development of national legislation. In the case that national legislation does not meet international standards, the decision of the European Court of Human Rights may encourage the state to amend its legal acts to meet convention standards.

The article is devoted to the study of the European Court of Human Rights practice implementation into the national legal system by domestic legal science, in particular, administrative law. It is noted that the issue of the European Court of Human Rights decisions implementing into the national legal system arose before Ukraine in 1997 when the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms was ratified. It is noted that a significant role in the process of national law improving belongs to the European Court of Human Rights, which is the body monitoring compliance with the Council of Europe’s Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by the Member States. Emphasis is placed on the fact that to date there has been no comprehensive study of the European Court of Human Rights practice in the administrative law sources system, which would be based on Western legal culture in Ukraine. It is noted that the European Court of Human Rights decisions nature is a “challenge” for the domestic legal system, that did not recognize case law as a source of law and, moreover, the interpretation of the category “human rights” by Strasbourg court is qualitatively different from its understanding by domestic legal doctrine, still being largely based on the perception of rights as opportunities guaranteed by law. Until now, the principle of legality was the fundamental law principle, and the justification of the decision taken in the administrative process was reduced to a reference to the prescription of the normative legal act. Legal provisions set out in judgments of the European Court of Human Rights are based on other legal postulates. The analysis of scientific sources, the object of study of which is the European Court of Human Rights practice as a source of administrative law, is being tcarried ou. It is suggested that the existing scientific research of the European Court of Human Rights as a source of administrative law be classified into two groups: scientific papers, the subject of which is the European Court of Human Rights practice; scientific papers, the subject of which is the impact of the European Court of Human Rights practice on the national legal system, the immanence of features of forms of lawforms to this practice, etc. It is concluded that the analysis of scientific developments of the European Court of Human Rights practice as a source of administrative law by domestic legal science allows us to conclude about the relevance of the chosen topic, its lack of research and the need for elucidation.

The article deals with the ways of regarding the case law of the European Court of Human Rights as a source of criminal procedural law of Ukraine, which is relevant both in terms of the criminal procedure as a science and for the practice of law enforcement. The purpose of the article is to formulate the concept of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights as a source of criminal procedural law of Ukraine. The paper justifies the opinion that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights is developed and based on the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and the European Commission of Human Rights, regardless of the country in which they were adopted (i. e. has a polyterritorial jurisdiction over states being the participants of the Convention). The article proves that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights is draws upon the decisions made by the European Court of Human Rights and the European Commission of Human Rights regardless of the time of adoption, i. e. it includes the decisions adopted before Ukraine ratified the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The author points out the appropriateness of classifying decisions that have acquired the status of final as «case law of the European Court of Human Rights». It is also mentioned that there is a need to include final decisions in the case (as the matter of fact), which have a decisive nature and contain a legal position in this case, into the scope of the category «case law of the European Court of Human Rights». Moreover, the article substantiates the necessity to include the decisions adopted by the European Court of Human Rights in full, i. e. not only the set forth legal positions, into the category of «case law of the European Court of Human Rights». Following the results of the study, the case law of the European Court of Human Rights as a source of criminal procedural law of Ukraine is defined as a set of decisions adopted by the European Court of Human Rights and the European Commission of Human Rights, which have entered into force and contain legal policies which either clarify or specify the provisions of the Convention as for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and relate to human and citizen’s rights and freedoms.

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

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.

The article has been devoted to the analysis of the nature of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights as a source of constitutional law of Ukraine. The nature of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights has been characterized depending on the following factors: state legal system, constitutional approach to the relation between national and international law, the level of bindingness of decisions of the European Court of Human Rights for public authorities. The author has concluded on the duality of nature the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, namely that, the author considers that the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights have a complicated, complex structure, combining the properties of both a right-interpreting act and a judicial precedent. According to the author, the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights are intended not only to resolve the cases under trial, but also to specify and interpret the rules of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. It has been established that the current Ukrainian legislation, establishing the primacy of the rule of law before the law, provides for the obligation of the judicial authorities to apply the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights as a source of law and at the same time the duty of the state to enforce the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in cases where Ukraine is the defendant. In addition, as the case law of the European Court of Human Rights shows, the judiciary itself emphasizes in its decisions the interpretative nature and the binding nature of all its decisions to be taken into account by all States parties. The Constitutional Court of Ukraine constantly uses the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights to form its own legal positions, after which they actually become a substantive element of the motivating part of the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. It has been concluded that regardless of whether or not the decision of the European Court of Human Rights has been ruled on Ukraine, it is a source of constitutional law in Ukraine.

The article explores the main problems of the application by the national courts of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights as a source of law. Analyzing the rules of the law and examining the views of the Supreme Court have highlighted the problematic issues of the obligation to apply the case law of the European Court of Human Rights to national courts as a source of law. The researchers' positions on the obligation of national courts to apply the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in cases against other states are examined and the importance of the application of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights is highlighted. Analyzing the views of scholars and experts, we have proposed ways to address the issues of the binding application of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights by reviewing the plenary sessions of high courts. The problems of the application of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights by national courts, such as the selective application of the case law of the Court, references to general principles and interpretations, ignoring the conditions of their application, absolutization of the binding position of the Court, application of the decisions of the Court by analogy, reference to the practice Court in the presence of clear and consistent provisions of national law, etc. The following ways of solving these problems are proposed: 1) revising the concept and content of the Law of Ukraine "On the implementation of decisions and application of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights" and amending the legislation in order to bring it in line with the provisions of the new procedural legislation and modern ideas of theorists and practitioners about the legal nature of decisions The European Court of Human Rights; 2) preparing a resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court on the application of the Convention and the case-law of the Court, which should be based on a thorough analysis of the shortcomings and peculiarities of the case-law of the national courts. The problematic issues of the application of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in the absence of official translations of the Court's decisions are examined. Analyzing the views of scholars and experts, we have proposed ways to solve these problems by creating a single electronic database that will contain official translations of Court decisions in the Ukrainian language that will ensure their accessibility and dissemination.

This article examines the procedural and legal standards governing the application of medical coercive measures against offenders who are deemed legally irresponsible due to mental disorders. Focusing primarily on the Azerbaijani context, the study analyzes relevant provisions of the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure, including judicial practice, Supreme Court decisions, and Plenum resolutions such as the 2012 therapeutic intervention guidelines. By exploring these instruments, the article highlights the mechanisms available for balancing public safety with the rights and medical needs of individuals who are not criminally responsible. In parallel, the article considers European legal frameworks, with particular emphasis on the standards established by the European Court of Human Rights and national legislations of selected European countries. This comparative approach allows for the identification of best practices, procedural safeguards, and the ways in which European states reconcile the protection of human rights with societal interests in security and crime prevention. Through a critical comparison of Azerbaijani and European approaches, the study identifies gaps in national legislation, inconsistencies in procedural implementation, and challenges faced by judicial authorities in applying medical coercive measures. The findings underscore the necessity of harmonizing Azerbaijani law with international human rights standards, ensuring both effective protection of society and respect for the fundamental rights of legally irresponsible offenders. The article concludes with policy recommendations and legal reform proposals aimed at strengthening the procedural framework, enhancing judicial oversight, and promoting a rights-compliant approach to medical coercive interventions. By bridging the gap between national practice and European standards, the study contributes to the broader discourse on human rights protection, criminal justice reform, and the ethical treatment of mentally disordered offenders. Keywords: public dangerousness, elements of a crime, objective aspect, criminal omission, criminological characteristics, passive conduct, criminological prevention, latent crime.

The article examines some aspects of realization of the rule of law principle in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. The author notes that the principle of the rule of law is a fundamental component of international legal acts regulating human rights and fundamental freedoms. It is emphasized that the Constitution of Ukraine proclaims that the principle of the rule of law is recognized and operates in Ukraine, but the concept of the rule of law itself is not fully disclosed in national legislation. The principle of the rule of law is actually the only effective means of ensuring the inviolability of democracy. The separate elements of this principle as its integral parts and mandatory prerequisites through which the European Court of Human Rights reveals the content of the rule of law was considered. The author provides examples of grouping certain requirements of the rule of law in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. The author notes that there are no unified approaches to understanding the exact meaning of the rule of law principle either in theory or in practice. The author substantiates that the elements of the rule of law in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights are legality, legal certainty, fairness of a trial and priority of human rights. The main element of the rule of law in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights is legality. The requirement of legality has formal (procedural) and substantive aspects (requirements for the quality of the law). It is noted that the requirement to respect human rights and recognize their priority is key in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. Cases of human rights restrictions must comply with the principle of proportionality. The provisions of the documents of the Venice Commission on the understanding of principle of the rule are analyzed, the activity of the European Court of Human Rights in ensuring the principle of the rule of law in the process of protection of human rights and freedoms is studied. The author concludes that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights is the basis for understanding the essence of the rule of law as a principle. The author emphasizes that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights has a positive impact on the indicators of strengthening the rule of law in the state, and contributes to the improvement of each individual element of this principle and all of them in aggregate.

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.

The article is devoted to determining the ways of strengthening the guarantees of exercising the powers of the Commissioner for the European Court of Human Rights. Pertinence of the issues raised in the article stems from the fact that analysis of the provisions of the legislation of Ukraine determining the organization, powers and procedure of activities of the Commissioner for the European Court of Human Rights indicates the absence or insufficiency of adequate guarantees for the exercise of powers by this government official in the main areas of their activity, which negatively affects the institutional capacity of the Commissioner for the European Court of Human Rights. In order to fulfill the tasks assigned to them to ensure the representation of Ukraine in the European Court of Human Rights and execution of its judgments, the Commissioner for the European Court of Human Rights is vested with powers that include their, first of all, with: (1) the state executive service and the state treasury in part of the compensation payments; (2) administrative bodies whose area of competence includes taking additional individual measures by reviewing the applicant’s case; (3) by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine and the Supreme Court of Ukraine within executing the measures of a general nature. In order to fulfill the tasks of the Commissioner for the European Court of Human Rights, they are assigned a control toolkit that is not coercive and does not include effective incentives. The greatest influence on the government authorities can be exerted only by submitting a grievance to the Prime Minister of Ukraine and initiating an investigation of the actions or malfeasance of officials of the state executive service by this service itself. Instead, the Commissioner for the European Court of Human Rights should have the authority to issue orders on chiefs of relevant government authorities calling them on to implement the measures provided for by the decision of the European Court of Human Rights (provided that they are informed about the essence and rules of implementation of these measures), with the possibility to impose administrative sanction on them for repeated non-fulfillment without good reason of the measures provided for by the decision of the European Court of Human Rights, as well as imposing on the officials of respective government authority responsibility measures for charging interest ECHR and other negative consequences.