POLITICAL DETERMINANTS AND SPECIFIC STATE AND LEGAL CONFLICTS IN UKRAINE

Abstract

Problem setting. The situation of political conflict in the public sphere of Ukraine requires serious perfection of control the system by the state. The article is devoted author interpretation of essence, nature and specific ofstate and legal conflicts in the field ofpublic policy of Ukraine, as to confrontation which arises up between or into the institutes of power as a result of violations of functioning of state mechanism. Complication of modernization and reforms of legal institutes of the state, sharpening ofpolitical fight in Ukraine for the redistribution of resources of power strengthen actuality of problem of diagnostics and settlement of state-legal conflict.Analysis of main researches. It was begun fundamentally to study the problem ofstate and legal conflicts in the 90-years of XX century - V. Kudryavcev, Yu. Todika, V. Tatsiy, M. Panov, L. Herasina, Yu. Barabash, A. Yezerov, A. Ishmuratov, S. Bobrovnik, others. By an object of researches was become by conflicts between the subjects of state legal relationships - Center and regions, between different organs and structures of power, by competitive political groups and others that. Also the social and political factors of state- legal conflicts were probed by M. Mikhal’chenko, Ye. Golovakha, V. Tancher, V. Cvetkov, I. Kresina et al in a sociological paradigm.Paper objective. The purpose of the article is theoretical research of essence and specific of flowing of state-legal conflicts, foremost in Ukraine, and determination of force and vectors of influence of political determinant, which draw or strengthen repeatedly conflicts in a country.Presentation of main body. A modern political process shows that control the system by the state has contradictory character, in fact the state system of Ukraine was folded on principles of political, economic and spiritual variety. But a ruling elite stubbornly does not wish to take into account this factor, and the detailed political doctrine of modernization of country absents still. Conducted in the last years of reforms does not give rapid results, new forms and facilities of government are inculcated contradictory; and it transforms them on «provocative drivers», political determinants of conflicts.It is well-proven in the paradigm ofpolitical conflictology, that the content of «conflict ofinterests» in the state-rightfield is opposing of elites and collision between administrative groups for prerogatives and resources of power. Conflicts of interests in parliament, government, judicial bodies of Ukraine are various and testify to political dichotomy is democracy against a nomenclature! Contradictory dialectics of intercommunication of policy and state administration often appears in the crisis capability (stagnaion, disfunctions) of politicians and rights institutes. International practice shows even, that exactly between the institutes of legislative and executive power more frequent all there are state-legal conflicts.In modern Ukraine all of constitutional process of creation of the state it is enough not simple, and collisions and spores of imperious structures did not disappear through prerogatives and jurisdictions, and often pass to hard confrontation. Permanent renewal of conflicts in Ukrainian state space depends on negative influence of political determinant: low level of legal culture of some groups state machine; off-grade legal adjusting of constitutional relations; conservatism of thought and corporate egoism of certain political forces; absence is in the structures of state power of experience of decision of conflict questions by a consensus; and acts of hostility for injury of national safety of Ukraine it territorial integrity and others. Effective, collision-free cooperation executive, legislative and judicial power of Ukraine must lean against the balance ofjurisdictions of their institutes and organs fastened a constitution.Conclusions. Confrontation in the actions of Ukrainian state power is predefined the unsteadiness of priorities in strategy of the state and chaoticness of reforms of political system.