Types of measures regarding the implementation of decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in Ukraine

The subject of research are conceptual, theoretical, methodological and applied bases of legal and economic nature concerning the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in Ukraine. Methodology. General scientific and special legal methods were used in the process of research. Quantitative and qualitative parameters of organizational, legal and economic measures on execution of judgments, including judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in Ukraine were determined by means of the analysis. The synthesis provided the formation of common features of negative and positive factors that hinder and promote, respectively, the execution of judgments. The comparative legal method allowed to identify characteristic common and distinctive features in the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in Ukraine at different times (2016 and 2021), taking into account legal and economic prerequisites. The formal-legal method created prerequisites for the formulation of conclusions regarding the effectiveness of individual and general measures taken to implement judgments. The purpose of the article is to establish the status and outline the prospects for the implementation of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights through the study of the legal and economic foundations of the relevant national and international legal regime of this process, as well as the jurisdictional activities of the subjects of control and supervision over its course. The results of the research showed that the state of implementation of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in Ukraine is directly related to a number of measures of various origins, including economic ones, which are based on strict compliance with the requirements of the ratified Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Conclusion. Legal and economic basis for the implementation of the content of the Strasbourg Court judgments on the territory of Ukraine is covered by international and national legal regime, with priority given to the first. Procedures for execution of the said judicial decision are determined, where two groups are distinguished in the plane of national legal regime: those that are aimed primarily at ensuring a private interest; those that create conditions for satisfaction of a public interest. Characteristic features in the execution of court decisions compared to 2016 and 2021 were revealed: an increase in the number of appeals of Ukrainians for the protection of rights and fundamental freedoms; an increase in the number of satisfied compensation claims; the presence of homogeneous problems contributing to the violation of human rights and interests in Ukraine; a decrease in the level of implementation of compensation solutions, which is associated with certain negative aspects of social life of an economic nature; expansion of the scope of consideration on the merits and related judicial decisions, taking into account the list of rights defined by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; improvement and implementation of a strategic approach in implementing the content of general measures for the execution of judgments, in particular this international instance; implementation of the legal, economic, cultural and informational framework at the level of educational standards, which will contribute to the implementation of the content of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. The following directions have been identified as priorities for the near future in terms of legal and economic execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights: creation of a systematic mechanism for implementing the content of judgments, including those of the Strasbourg Court; maximum differentiation of general measures within the framework of the implementation of the content of such decisions; priority of measures of organizational, legal, economic, informational and educational nature; emphasis in the relevant measures on the issue of balancing public and private interests, but by no means to the detriment of the former.

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 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 purpose of the article is to determine the most effective measures of realization of the right to health that Ukraine could take in order to bring the law enforcement practice in line with the standards of the European Convention on Human Rights and precedents of the European Court of Human Rights, taking into account the experience of countries of the European Union and the Council of Europe, developing the most effective mechanisms for applying the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in domestic criminal procedure in this regard. Methodology. The methodological basis of the article is a set of methods of scientific knowledge, among which the dialectical method occupies a leading place. General philosophical, general scientific and special legal methods of research were also used. Particular attention is paid to comparatively legal, structural-functional, regulatory-logical and systematic methods of research. The scientific novelty is that the authors attempted to analyze and evaluate mechanisms for ensuring the right to health care in criminal proceedings produced by European practice. The precedents of the European Court of Human Rights on the exercise of the right to health through the protection of the right to life, the prohibition of torture, the right to liberty and security of person, the right to a fair trial, respect for privacy and family life, the protection of housing are explored. Recommendations on the feasibility of implementing certain standards reflected in the European Convention on Human Rights in Ukraine’s criminal procedural legislation have been made, and theoretical, practical and legislative proposals have been made to increase the level of protection of the right to health at the national level. Conclusions.The right to health, as an international standard of criminal justice, as elaborated by the European Court of Human Rights and reflected in the national legislation, is an intricate, complex concept that includes various options and rights that need protection. The right to health care can be exercised in the framework of the protection of those recognized by the European Convention on Human Rights and reflected in the national legislation, such as: the right to respect for privacy and family life (right to physical and moral integrity), the right to liberty and personal integrity, the right to information and confidentiality, the right to an eco-friendly environment, the right to obtain reliable and timely information on factors that affect health. An analysis of the precedents of the European Court of Human Rights on the decisions of domestic courts in the part of disputes related to the exercise of the right to health care allows to ascertain its relative “youth”. The Court’s precedents on the complaints concerning violations of the right to health care by law enforcement and judicial authorities in Ukraine demonstrate the need to increase the level of protection of the right at the national level by: providing legal education of the population; informing the authorized participants of thecriminal procedure (investigators, prosecutors, judges) of the conventional provisions on the protection of the right to health care, as well as the practice of their application by the European Court of Human Rights; modification of departmental/interagency regulatory documents that will determine the content and list of biological specimens of a person

Regional human rights courts like the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), and the African Court of Human and People's Rights (ACtHPR) have become popular sites of mobilization for victims and activists who seek justice when justice fails at home. Besides being platforms for individual remedy, human rights courts increasingly shape social norms and state policy within countries, making them attractive avenues for rights advocates to develop new norms or to push domestic authorities to reform legislation. The judges of these courts can decide, for example, whether same-sex couples have a right to be married, if prisoners have the right to vote or receive HIV/AIDS treatment, or when a state can deport illegal immigrants to a country where they will likely be tortured. As these courts pass their judgments, they often find themselves in conflict with states that are violating human rights of marginalized groups on a large scale and are unwilling to implement international rulings. Although international human rights courts have become increasingly popular venues among victims and activists who seek justice when justice fails at home, we are only beginning to understand how activists play roles in shaping the development of regional human rights courts' case law—the body of judgments that shapes how judges will make their decisions in the future. We now have plenty of international relations and international legal research on the interactions between states and international courts: how judges in these courts wrestle between deferring to the interests of member state governments whose actions are on trial and sticking closely to the conventions' fundamental yet evolving principles (Alter et al., 2019; Helfer & Voeten, 2014). As some states begin to resist international courts' authority, scholars have begun to examine the dynamics of this backlash (Hillebrecht, 2022; Madsen et al., 2018; Sandholtz et al., 2018). Recent studies have also demonstrated that human rights advocates—whether NGOs or individual lawyers—have a significant impact on shaping the jurisprudence of international courts and the impact judgments have in concrete locations (Kahraman, 2018; Sundstrom, 2014; van der Vet, 2012; Kurban, 2020; Conant, 2018; Harms, 2021; Cichowski, 2016; Hodson, 2011; Haddad, 2018). Meanwhile, these advocates themselves have been subject to repression and stigmatization by governments as part of the backlash phenomenon. Without an adequate understanding of the factors shaping activists' engagement with international courts, we risk undervaluing their strategic impact on the expansion of case law, the human rights protection of marginalized groups who cannot find remedies at home, and the domestic implementation of these judgments in an age of state backlash. In this section, we summarize the three papers contained in this symposium and their original contributions to these themes. Over the last decade, dozens of countries have erected legal barriers or started vilifying campaigns to stymie the work of NGOs (Buyse, 2018; Chaudhry, 2022). One tactic in this toolkit is the enactment of burdensome regulation on NGOs that receive funds from foreign donors as they allegedly promote foreign agendas (Christensen & Weinstein, 2013; Dupuy et al., 2021). States that frequently abuse human rights are especially prone to target NGOs that engage in strategic litigation (Hillebrecht, 2019). Most NGOs depend on foreign funding, and NGOs that litigate international cases fall disproportionately in this category, but do funders affect the selection of cases? In “Foreign Agents or Agents of Justice? Private Foundations, NGO Backlash, and International Human Rights Litigation,” Heidi Haddad and Lisa Sundstrom examine the extent to which Western donors, particularly private foundations, have encouraged NGOs in Europe to litigate at the ECtHR as a human rights advocacy strategy. They examine overall patterns of donor funding and NGO litigation records, and look in more detail at the case of Russian NGOs' foreign funding and litigation records. The analysis is extremely timely, as the Russian government's criminalization of independent civil society actors, especially in the human rights field, and their accusation that foreign funding turns NGOs into “foreign agents” have been crucial elements of the Russian regime's autocratization. This claim has also provided fuel for Russia's disenchantment with the ECtHR in recent years, contributing to the assessment of many observers that Russia's full-scale attack on Ukraine was the last straw in an inevitable collision course leading to its exit from the Council of Europe. Haddad and Sundstrom debunk the idea that foreign donors are pushing NGOs toward strategies of human rights litigation. Instead, they argue, there is more evidence that NGOs themselves promoted the mechanism of international litigation as a strategy that donors later adopted. This article is a poignant reminder of the advocacy tools that Russian human rights activists and citizens have lost as a result of their government's departure from the Council of Europe, including ECtHR jurisdiction. Yet it also provides insight into the likely roles of foreign donors in other country cases where NGOs are using international court litigation as a human rights advocacy strategy, which is often a target of the ire of national governments, as explored in the next article in the symposium. When states attack human rights NGOs within their borders and/or international human rights courts themselves, how does this affect the willingness of those NGOs to take cases to international courts, and the ways in which they do so? De Silva and Plagis ask this question in their article about state backlash against NGOs in the case of Tanzania and the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights. A fascinating empirical question they pose is: does state backlash against NGOs increase NGO litigation at international courts (to contest state repression at those courts and use international mechanisms when domestic ones are not available), roughly in line with Keck and Sikkink's famous “boomerang pattern” (Keck & Sikkink, 1998), or decrease it due to heightened fear and restricted NGO capabilities that state repression creates? Employing a process-tracing analysis of NGOs' involvement in three cases before the African Court at different stages of the Tanzanian government's backlash against the Court, De Silva and Plagis find that “two-level backlash” by states can result in both phenomena, either promoting or deterring NGO legal mobilization at international human rights courts, depending on certain conditions. The three selected cases concerning the death penalty, the rights of persons with albinism, and the rights of pregnant schoolgirls and mothers, which took place at different time periods, demonstrate a number of patterns of state backlash interacting with NGO strategies. The authors find that domestic-level state backlash deterred domestic NGOs from partnering with international NGOs in litigation, but that such backlash, when it repressed domestic political and legal mobilization opportunities, actually encouraged both Tanzanian and international NGOs to turn to the African Court more frequently to seek remedies. International-level backlash in turn only deterred NGOs from international litigation when such backlash consisted of state efforts to restrict NGOs' ability to engage in litigation, and not when the international backlash was in the form of routine noncompliance with African Court rulings. Importantly, the authors find that NGO responses to state backlash were significantly shaped by their degree of legal consciousness and expertise with the rules, proceedings, and workings of the African Court. Those NGOs with less knowledge and experience were more likely to back away from engaging with the Court under the pressure of state backlash. De Silva and Plagis conclude that “NGOs' persistent human rights advocacy in the face of state backlash is a double-edged sword,” in the sense that they may not be deterred by state backlash initially, but there is a danger that their continued determination to engage in international litigation could prompt governments to engage in even more severe forms of backlash, with critical impacts on international courts and already vulnerable human rights defenders. Rights advocates have a growing menu of institutions and courts available to them. How do activists choose at which institution to lodge their cases in a world where legal remedies have diversified, or as some have argued, fragmented (Koskenniemi & Leino, 2002)? In “What Makes an International Institution Work for Labor Activists? Shaping International Law through Strategic Litigation,” Filiz Kahraman goes beyond the tendency of legal mobilization studies to only examine how activists interact with a single court or institution. Instead, Kahraman opens up how rights advocates imagine which institution is most receptive to their claims. Drawing on a comparative interview study of British and Turkish trade union activists and their legal mobilization campaigns at international courts and quasi-judicial institutions like the International Labor Organization (ILO), Kahraman examines how activists first probe and then strategically identify which court or international institution is most susceptible to their primary goals of influencing structural reforms and setting new norms. Through this probing process—or dynamic signaling game between courts and litigants—activists push a court's jurisprudence and case law into new issue areas. For instance, at the ECtHR, Turkish trade unionists challenged domestic courts' ruling that public sector workers did not have the right to establish unions, even though the ECtHR had no established case law on labor rights in 1990s. They won the case, with the ECtHR finding that Turkey violated the right of public sector workers to unionize. These cases not only had an impact within Turkey, but over the next decades, similar cases brought by British unionists would spin off the early precedent set by the Turkish legal mobilization efforts. Kahraman argues that they ultimately pushed the ECtHR to recognize the basic trade union rights as fundamental human rights. Kahraman sheds light on the often hidden strategies behind international litigation. Activists litigate not just for the immediate impact on the current case they work on, but how they envision that all the cases they work on may shape norms and domestic structural reforms further in the future. Whether an institution is perceptive of claims lies in the eye of the beholder. Kahraman finds that besides targeting institutions with high compliance rates, they also take cases to institutions with low rates of compliance, especially “if these institutions have extensive judicial authority to create new international norms.” So, it is not the de jure protection set by an international courts, but rather how activists perceive the juridical responsiveness and judicial authority of courts—or, how judges adopt either an activist approach or restraint in response to incoming cases and how willing states are to implement cases of a court, respectively—that determines why activists select certain courts or quasi-judicial institutions (like the ILO). Kahraman gives us new tools to interpret how activists perceive authority and receptiveness and respond to opportunities. Rather than static external legal remedies, courts and quasi-judicial institutions are opportunity structures that are malleable to the strategic vision of the activist or litigant. The articles in this symposium together reveal a number of key overlapping insights. At the broadest level, they demonstrate that activists' behaviors and strategies influence international courts' jurisprudence, politics within states, and the human rights outcomes of everyday citizens—and these influences have often been hidden in our existing canon of research on international courts. In addition, all of these articles show that, while activists may face challenges in their efforts, often including significant backlash from their home state governments, they also continue to retain significant agency through their creative efforts to develop legal strategies and circumvent state repression. Activists perennially innovate: sparking the ideas that inspire donors who fund them; calculating how to continue their litigation work when government actors threaten them; and taking risks in litigation to push courts to expand how they define human rights. However, along with these uplifting conclusions, there are worrying patterns that demand future research. States are increasingly pushing back against the powers of international courts to bind them to costly measures, and as this symposium has shown, national governments often point to activists as contributors to this “problem” of invasive international human rights standards. A growing body of research has tracked how human rights defenders of all kinds globally are under threat from actors like governments and corporations who disagree with their contentious actions. We need more studies that gather comprehensive data and systematically track these threats, specifically with regard to activists who engage in international human rights litigation. We suspect that such activists are likely disproportionately targeted due to the international visibility of their complaints. We also desperately need research into possible innovative responses to these threats to activists—responses from activists, funders, governments of countries that support human rights, and international courts themselves. Freek van der Vet is a University Researcher at the Erik Castrén Institute of International Law and Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Helsinki and the principal investigator of the Toxic Crimes Project. Lisa McIntosh Sundstrom is Professor of Political Science at the University of British Columbia. She is the director of the ActinCourts network at UBC and conducts research on legal mobilization by Russian activists.

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.

Problem setting. According to the data as of 01.01.2020 in the register of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) are registered 8850 applications filed against Ukraine, which is 14.8% of the total number of applications. And although Ukraine took 3rd place (in 2017 Ukraine ranked first) in the number of complaints against it to the ECtHR, after Russia (15,050 complaints) and Turkey (9,250 complaints), it should be noted that a significant number of complaints, namely 40 complaints are still in breach of Article 3 of the ECHR (prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment). Thus, the correct interpretation and understanding of the concepts used in Article 3 of the ECHR is very important for Ukraine, it is related both to the quality of adopted laws and to the practice of the authorities, especially law enforcement and courts. Analysis of recent researches and publications. The research of certain aspects of the interpretation of the concepts of Article 3 of the ECHR was studied by the following Ukrainian legal scholars: Orlova O.O., Trykhlib H., Tsebenko S., Okhota Y., Shishkina E., Rabinovych P. , Pushkar P., Fuley T., Chervyatsova A. Target of research is interpretation of the concepts used in Article 3 of the Convention on the basis of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, for their proper understanding and application. Conclusions and prospects for the development. Thus, the prohibitions in Article 3 of the ECHR are absolute and unconditional. Prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is one that contains no exceptions, regardless of the situation in which the person is. This norm is an imperative norm and clearly reflects the basic (fundamental) values of a democratic society, and any violation of it by the international community is considered a gross violation of human rights. Everyone has the right to be treated with dignity by others, regardless of individual characteristics, circumstances or place (in hospitals, at large, in places of imprisonment). Everyone should be aware of the inadmissibility of such actions, and these prohibitions should not only be declared, but also implemented. In general, the ECtHR has a positive effect on respect for human rights in Ukraine and is a real mechanism for protecting citizens in many cases.

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.

Forensic psychiatry assessment and human rights in Ukraine: response to Butenko et al's paper 'Forensic psychiatry misuse in proceedings of administrative offenses' (2023)Type of submission.

The article deals with the right of people to appeal for the protection of their rights and freedoms to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). In Ukraine, the problem of optimal organization and effective activity of public authorities in ensuring human rights lies in the sphere of ensuring the rule of law. The assertion and protection of human rights and freedoms is the main function of the Ukrainian state. An important confirmation of the significance of the institution of human rights as an object of protection by international institutions lies in the fact that in the current Constitution of Ukraine there are norms, which establish the inalienability and inviolability of these rights and set up a categorical prohibition on the adoption of laws and other normative legal acts that would restrict human rights or freedoms or narrow their content. However, the mechanisms of protecting human rights in Ukraine under the conditions of the socio-economic and political crisis are not enough effective, since systematic violations are traced. Special attention should be paid to the struggle against organized crime and corruption, which undermine the trust of people in their rights, as well as the ability of the authorities to ensure law and order. It is concluded that the European choice of Ukraine defined its state policy, which is aimed at approaching the living standards of citizens to European standards, rooting European values in all spheres of the functioning of the Ukrainian state and society. In the context of the adaptation of Ukrainian legislation to the EU legislation, the guarantee of human rights is the key to stable partnerships with the EU member states. Therefore, an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights is considered as an additional guarantee of ensuring the rights and freedoms of man and citizen at the international level, as well as the mechanism for their protection in cases where a person is not satisfied with the decision of the domestic court, and there are violations of legal norms. The reflection of standards in the field of human rights, taking into account the national identity, will enable the fullest exercise and protection of human rights, and increase the level of legal culture. Such a system of legal conscience should be aimed at recognizing the axiological content of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen in their combination with the rights of society and the state. However, we believe that Ukraine should continue to make significant efforts to ensure the effectiveness of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, to create new effective national remedies against its violations, to adapt national legislation to European standards more actively. Thus, the most effective and immediate protection of human rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention should be ensured at the national level.

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.

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Protocol No 1 to Convention — Article 3 — Russian Constitution — Article 15 of Russian Constitution — Russian Constitution having supreme legal force — Execution of judgment of European Court of Human Rights — Whether possible to execute judgment of European Court of Human Rights in accordance with Russian ConstitutionJurisdiction — Execution of judgments — Judgments of European Court of Human Rights — Hierarchy of legal acts — Article 15 of Constitution of Russian Federation — Supreme legal force of Russian Constitution — International law as part of national legal order — Whether international judgments to be executed only if conforming with Russian Constitution — Power of Russian Constitutional Court to review compatibility of judgments with Russian ConstitutionTreaties — Interpretation — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — “Evolutive” interpretation — Whether “evolutive” interpretation should be based on consensus between all Contracting States — Whether absence of consensus giving Contracting State right to object to interpretationHuman rights — Execution of judgments — Judgments of European Court of Human Rights — Execution by measure of general character — Execution by amendment of national law — Execution by political process — Achieving conformity through means of application of apparently non-conforming ruleHuman rights — Right to vote and stand for election — Article 3 of Protocol No 1 to European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Restrictions of right to vote for convicted prisoners — Article 32(3) of Constitution of Russian Federation — Application of provisionHuman rights — Execution of judgments — Judgments of European Court of Human Rights — Execution by measure of individual character — Whether execution by measure of individual character possible when applicant may not be considered a victim of established violation — European Court of Human Rights — Competence — Whether review of provisions of national legislation in abstracto permissible — Whether European Court of Human Rights can review a particular application of provision in concreto — Whether finding on violation when applicant not qualifying as victim amounting to review in abstracto — The law of the Russian Federation

The research relevance was determined by the need to create an effective mechanism for enforcing judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in the context of their systematic non-enforcement by Ukraine and the existing threat of weakening the guarantees of observance and safeguarding the fundamental freedoms and rights. Consequently, the research endeavour focused on examining the challenges and barriers present within the mechanisms responsible for implementing to the rulings issued by the ECHR as well as the judgments rendered by domestic courts operating at the national level. The methods used in the study include historical, statistical, legal hermeneutics and others. The core findings and central conclusions drawn from the research investigation are to reveal the prerequisites for Ukraineʼs integration to the European supranational judicial protection system, the impact of this event in the context of guaranteeing basic human entitlements; focus on data regarding Ukraineʼs participation as a defending party in international legal disputes. The author examined which rights are most often violated in the context of lawsuits against the Ukrainian state before the ECHR, in particular, the right to free movement and personal integrity, as well as facts related to the duration of proceedings, fair trial, etc. The author also pointed to two major pilot judgments delivered by the Court – Case No. 40450/04 and Case No. 46852/13, which point to a systematic and structural issue of inaction to properly implement the judgments of the ECHR and national courts. This analysis delved into the underlying factors that contribute to the challenges in enforcing judgments, which include imperfect legislation and insufficient funding. The author pointed out the need for a comprehensive approach to improving this area through the development of effective remedies and alternative ways of paying compensation. This studyʼs outcomes serve as a springboard for further research by sociologists, legal professionals, political scientists, and policymakers, paving the way for a more dependable court enforcement framework

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.

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.