International standards of mediation as an alternative way to resolve legal disputes and their implementation in the conditions of european integration of Ukraine

Abstract

The article describes the international standards of mediation as an alternative way of resolving legal disputes and substantiating the prospects of their implementation in Ukraine.
 It is substantiated that the leading role in the formation of mediation standards is played by global and regional international organizations and unions, in particular, the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the European Union, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the International Chamber of Commerce, the World Trade Organization, etc. Due to their normative and organizational activities, these entities have developed a number of leading and effective mediation standards, the implementation of which is still relevant for Ukraine. Considering the European integration intentions of Ukraine, the implementation of the standards of the Council of Europe and taking into account the experience and standards of mediation formed by the European Union are particularly relevant.
 International standards of mediation should be conditionally divided into two groups: 1) those related to the professional activity of mediation: professionalism of the mediator, experience, independence, neutrality and objectivity, responsibility of the mediator; 2) those related to the procedure and consequences of mediation: initiation of mediation by the parties or an authorized body, contractual grounds for conducting it, confidentiality, quality of mediation, guarantee of legal protection regardless of the conduct of mediation, clarity of the procedure and consequences of mediation for the parties, honesty of the mediation process, obligation of the decision made for the parties, payment of the mediator's services, etc.
 Standards related to ensuring the quality of mediation in Ukraine require implementation into the current legislation on mediation. The legislation does not define effective, simple and effective mechanisms for monitoring the quality of mediation. In particular, the possibility of bringing the mediator to civil, administrative, and criminal liability is determined. But there are actually no grounds for such responsibility in the industry legislation, which creates a gap.