Courts Of General Jurisdiction Research Articles

The development of the ideas of “electronic court” and “electronic mediation” in Russian and foreign law

This article focuses on the development and implementation of information technologies in courts of general jurisdiction. It compares the concept of “electronic court” in Russia and abroad and concludes with their different contents. Further, the article also focuses on using the “E-Court” system in Russia and “E-SUD” in Uzbekistan. This article analyzes the main problems hindering the development of mediation in Russia. In the future, mediation may become a key alternative to litigation because it saves time and money, maintains relations between the parties to a dispute, and makes a fair decision based on their sake. The development of mediation directly depends on the improvement of the legislative framework. Based on the identified issues, recommendations that will help to realize the potential of mediation have been proposed. The article aims to analyze the possibilities of developing electronic mediation and offers recommendations on the confidentiality of online mediation.

Legitimacy of Subjects of the Right to Judicial Protection in the Law Enforcement Practice of Land and Property Disputes Resolution: Formulation of the Problem

The article is devoted to the study of the problems of the ownership of the plaintiff and the defendant as parties to a land-property dispute in the current law enforcement practice of courts of general jurisdiction. The author emphasizes that the primary task of the judicial branch of government and a specific court as its representative is to correctly determine the subject composition of the case, the subject of which is the resolution of a land and property dispute. Achieving the specified task has two main consequences: obtaining legal protection of the violated, unrecognized or disputed right by the proper “offended” person and placing responsibility for the committed encroachment on property rights on the actual violator. The article analyzes the procedural institution of replacement of an improper defendant as a mechanism designed to ensure the implementation of the principle of ownership of the parties to the dispute in the civil process. In particular, the author drew attention to the fact that in the judicial practice of courts of all instances, the terms “proper plaintiff” and “improper plaintiff” are used, the definition of which is not contained in the current civil procedural legislation. In addition, the article analyzes the judicial law enforcement practice formed in the part of replacing an improper party in cases for the resolution of land and property disputes and formulates relevant conclusions regarding the ambiguity of the positions of courts of general and administrative jurisdiction in this matter. The author conducted a comparative analysis of the legal regulation of the institution of replacement of the proper party in a dispute under civil and administrative procedural legislation. Based on the results of the research, the author outlined the scientific and practical aspects of the investigated issues in this field of civil procedural law. In particular, the author comes to the conclusion about the inconsistency of the legislator’s vector regarding the development of an effective procedural mechanism for the protection of the rights of subjects of land legal relations, which in turn creates prerequisites for possible abuse of the court’s procedural powers.

Liability for Violation of the Obligation of Care in the Criminal Code of the Republic of Poland

The problem of non-fulfilment or improper fulfillment by parents (persons who replace them) of childcare responsibilities exists in all countries, regardless of the form of government, state system, and income level of the population. Ukraine has been in the process of integration with the European Union for a long time, so it is useful to study the foreign legislative approach to the regulation of responsibility for the violation of these obligations. The purpose of the article is to study the Polish experience of establishing criminal liability for non-fulfilment of child care obligations. In the research dogmatic, systemic-structural, statistical, historical-legal, formal-legal methods were used. Attention is paid to the legislation of the Republic of Poland, which provides for the right and duty of parents to care for and raise children. The genesis of the criminal law regarding responsibility for violation of these duties in the Criminal Code of 1932, 1969, and 1997 is given. Statistical data on the number of criminal proceedings and persons convicted of this criminal offense (2009–2020) are summarized. The peculiarities of the structure of the crime composition provided for in Art. 210 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Poland were studied; objective and subjective signs. The analysis was carried out on the basis of the doctrine of Polish criminal law and the practice of courts of general jurisdiction, in particular the Supreme Court of the Republic of Poland. The practice of the Constitutional Tribunal of the Republic of Poland was used. Based on the results of the research, conclusions were formulated regarding objects of criminal law protection; objective and subjective side and subject composition. The differentiation of criminal liability in case of causing death to the victim was noted. The legislator also provided in cases of this crime the possibility of notifying the competent family court about the expediency of deprivation or limitation of parental or guardian rights in case of committing a crime to the detriment of a minor or in complicity with him. The separation of an independent structural section (subsection) in the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which includes criminal offenses against the family, as well as the improvement of criminal legal measures against persons who have committed such crimes, is supported.

The system of administrative courts of the Federal Republic of Germany: organization and functioning

The article is devoted to the organization and functioning of administrative courts of general and special jurisdiction in the Federal Republic of Germany. Administrative justice in Germany is an independent branch of judicial power. It is represented by administrative courts of general and special jurisdiction and is separated from constitutional, general courts and courts of labor disputes.
 The system of administrative courts of general jurisdiction in Germany covers three levels: the administrative courts, the higher administrative courts of the states and the Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig. The administrative court is the court of first instance for most administrative proceedings. The higher administrative courts of the federal states are the appellate and cassation instance of the administrative courts. Each federal state has a Supreme Administrative Court, the states of Berlin and Brandenburg share a Supreme Administrative Court, which, with the exception of Bavaria, Saxony- Anhalt and the city-states, are not located in the capital of the state to emphasize their independence from the administration in terms of location. Higher administrative courts are courts of first instance in cases of judicial review of laws and regulations, prohibition of associations by state bodies, and approval of implementation of certain infrastructure projects. The Federal Administrative Court, located in Leipzig, is the court of appeal and cassation on matters of law. The legislature also gave the Federal Administrative Court first-instance jurisdiction in public law disputes between the federal government and non-constitutional Länder, bans on mergers by the Federal Minister of the Interior or approvals for certain infrastructure projects. In these cases, the Federal Administrative Court has jurisdiction of both first and last instance.
 A feature of administrative justice in Germany is the presence of special courts of administrative justice – financial and social courts with appropriate organization and functioning. The issue of the status of judges of administrative courts, non-professional judges, representatives of public interest, judicial administration, competence and jurisdiction was considered.

SPECIALIZED ADMINISTRATIVE COURTS REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN

The paper describes the historical path of formation and formation of the administrative courts of the Republic of Kazakhstan as specialized. The directions of development of specialized administrative courts, improvement of the quality of their consideration of administrative cases, as well as improvement of administrative proceedings are outlined. Explanations of the term’s administrative justice, administrative proceedings, administrative process and many others are given. The relevance of the topic is related to the conceptual directions of the development of the judicial system, the improvement of judicial proceedings and the improvement of judicial professionalism in accordance with the principle of specialization of courts and judges. The organizational and functional state of specialized administrative courts of Kazakhstan has been analyzed and evaluated. The study of these issues showed that they are formed according to the type of inter-district courts in cities of republican and regional significance, constitute the lowest level of courts of general jurisdiction, consider administrative cases arising from public legal relations, according to the rules of the court of first instance. Specialized administrative courts are analogous to administrative justice courts operating in a number of foreign countries, modeled after the Anglo-Saxon, French or German models. The theoretical significance of the work is that it analyzes the organizational and procedural foundations of the activities of specialized administrative courts in the context of the principle of specialization of courts and judges, which forms the basis of the structure and functioning of the unified judicial system headed by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The practical significance of the work is the conclusions formulated by the author, which can be used for scientific research. The methodological foundations of the study testify to the strict observance by the Republic of Kazakhstan of continuity in law and the state. The empirical basis of the work was data on the activities of specialized administrative courts on administrative cases considered by them for the period of the first six months of 2021-2023.

Peculiarities of property rights protection, their specific application to objects

The article examines the issue of the specifics of the protection of property rights, the specifics of their application to objects.
 Article 13 of the Constitution of Ukraine declares that the fundamental principle of in the field of protection of property rights there is a provision that the state provides equal protection of all subjects of property rights. In recent years, the question of protection of property rights has gained important theoretical and practical importance. The analysis of modern judicial practice shows that there is no unified position of judicial bodies on the resolution of disputes related to the violation of property rights. Courts of general jurisdiction and commercial courts, when considering disputes related to the protection of violated rights, ambiguously apply the norms of current legislation, therefore, the uncertainty of judicial authorities in the matter of the uniform application of the provisions of civil law to disputes of this category leads to the violation of the constitutional rights of owners.
 It is emphasized that the protection of property rights is a complex of civil legal means, which are aimed, on the one hand, at ensuring the normal economic use of property and maintaining property rights in an intact state, and, on the other hand, at restoring violated property relations, overcoming obstacles to their normal functioning and compensation for damages caused to the owner.
 As a conclusion, it is said that the protection of property rights acts as an independent subjective right that arises at the moment when there is a threat of its violation or dispute. This right includes powers, each of which involves the active implementation of positive actions.
 In the field of legal relations related to the protection of property rights, the objects of protection are directly the rights to certain objects. It is these rights that can be violated by other persons, and it is for their protection that the civil law provides for various means that a person can use to protect his violated or disputed rights, which are subject to protection by the law of interests.
 Subjects of legal relations related to the protection of property rights are, on the one hand, persons who have property rights to a specific object, and persons who retain property in accordance with relevant contracts or laws, and who, accordingly to legal norms, have the right to demand protection of their violated subjective rights. On the other hand, these are persons whose actions led to the unlawful violation of subjective rights to property objects.

The Personality of a Modern Bribetaker

A persistent negative situation in the sphere of corruption in Russia, as well as the enforcement of a new National Anti-corruption Plan for 2021-2024 approved by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of August 16, 2021 № 478, the search for new forms and methods of preventing this criminal social phenomenon and of counteracting it gain a special urgency. Experience shows that criminal law measures are not sufficient for counteracting corruption. Due to this, the role of criminology seems especially vital. A comprehensive study of the criminal’s personality will help to improve the effectiveness of preventive work for the category of people under consideration. The goal of the work is to research specific socio-demographic, moral-psychological, role and criminal law characteristics of the personality of a bribetaker in Russia today. The research is based on the analysis of Russian and foreign publications in journals of law and sociology. The empirical part consists in studying the decisions of the courts of general jurisdiction of different subjects of the Russian Federation (from 2018 to 2023) and official statistical information on criminal prosecution under Art. 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Besides, the author carried out a content analysis of electronic mass media on high-profile cases of bribery involving officials at different levels. It was found that, at the present time, a bribetaker in Russia is male (with a growing share of female bribetakers), aged 30-49, a Russian citizen with a higher education, married with underage children, employed by law enforcement or state and municipal bodies. He is described favorably as a responsible, sociable and competent person both at work and in personal life. Key individual psychological features include emotional stability, ability to control and manipulate people, ability to build necessary connections, denial of moral and criminal norms, avarice, tolerance to corruption, thirst for power and a desire to prove himself through illegal actions.

The Institution of Special Court Rulings in Civil Procedure: Problems of Application

The institution of a special court ruling is one of the procedural tools that ensures that courts of general jurisdiction, when considering cases in civil proceedings, strengthen the rule of law and prevent offenses. Special court rulings have a long history of development: they have gone from a mandatory form of procedural reaction of the court to detected violations of the rule of law or the rules of the socialist community to a response measure of the court to cases of violations of the rule of law attributed to its discretionary powers. At the same time, with the adoption of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the importance and effectiveness of the institution of a special court ruling have significantly decreased. Judicial statistics indicate that there is a long-term and gradually developing trend towards a decrease in the number of private rulings issued by courts of general jurisdiction in civil cases. This situation is caused by fragmented and incomplete legal regulation, its ambiguous interpretation, diversely developing judicial practice and the lack of clarification of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the practice of applying the institute of a special court ruling. In addition, the procedure for monitoring the enforcement of special court rulings by authorized persons in terms of informing them to the court about the measures taken to eliminate and prevent further violations of the rule of law goes beyond the function of the court to administer justice and imposes on the court the duties inherent in control (supervisory) bodies. The above circumstances raise questions about the necessity and expediency of having the institution of special court rulings in civil proceedings in its current form, as well as about the prospects for its further improvement.

Recognition of Arbitral Awards as Prejudicial Decisions

The paper deals with the problem of such a characteristic of arbitral awards as prejudice in relation to the consideration of cases by courts of general jurisdiction and arbitrazh courts. Despite the fact that more and more researchers and practitioners are inclined to recognize the decisions of arbitrazh courts as prejudicial, the work substantiates that such decisions cannot have a prejudicial significance for the consideration of cases in state courts. This takes place due to the fact that arbitrazh courts do not belong to the agencies for the administration of justice, and therefore arbitral awards represent the result of a private-law method of dispute resolution and, accordingly, do not have a public-law character. However, the prejudice of the circumstances established by the arbitral awards is not excluded if the State courts comply with a certain procedure. The paper attempts to describe the procedure for recognizing the circumstances contained in the arbitral award as prejudicial.

Subjects of preventing and countering criminal offenses related to corruption: functioning problems and prospects for improving the legal status

The article examines the subjects of prevention and counteraction to criminal offenses related to corruption. The author establishes that these are not only specialized law enforcement and judicial institutions (the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office, the High Anti-Corruption Court), but also institutions of general jurisdiction (the National Police of Ukraine, courts of general jurisdiction), as well as other entities, including government agencies, various categories of authorized persons, whistleblowers, and civil society institutions. Despite the fact that Ukraine operates a three-tier anti­corruption system (the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office, the High Anti-Corruption Court), which is a countermeasure to elite corruption, the main burden of detection and prosecution for criminal offenses related to corruption, entrusted to the investigators of the National Police of Ukraine, who investigate relevant criminal proceedings, and district or inter-district courts, which conduct judicial review of these proceedings. However, quantitative indicators of criminal prosecution of persons who have committed criminal offenses related to corruption do not always provide the necessary results. Individual facts of bringing to criminal responsibility officials occupying a responsible or particularly responsible position are important, as this can have a significantly greater preventive effect on the subjects of the declaration in order to prevent them from committing corruption or corruption-related criminal offenses.
 Based on the results of the analysis of the problems of the functioning of the specified subjects, the prospects for improving their legal status have been determined: 1) to create a mechanism for rewarding whistleblowers not only for corruption crimes, but also for criminal offenses provided for in Art. 366-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine; 2) ensure the institutional independence, separation of the head of the authorized unit (authorized person) by subordinating him/her directly to the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption; 3) expand the powers of authorized divisions (authorized persons) in the area of declaration; 4) supplement the Law of Ukraine "On Prevention of Corruption” of October 14, 2014 with the main tasks of the person responsible for the implementation of the anti-corruption program.

Section of Common Debt of Spouses: Selected Problems of Theory and Law Enforcement Practice

The article is devoted to the study of theoretical and practical issues of dividing the common debts of spouses. During the study, the authors examined approaches to defining the concept of “common debts of spouses” and analyzed legal norms on the division of common debts of spouses. Judicial practice (of courts of general jurisdiction and arbitration courts) has been studied to identify problems that arise in judicial practice when considering cases of division of property. Based on the results of the work, the authors proposed solutions to problems arising in judicial practice when considering disputes about the division of property, which consist in the need to make changes to family and civil legislation.

The main state guarantees for the remuneration of employees: analysis of legislation and court practice

According to judicial statistics on the work of courts of general jurisdiction in the consideration of civil cases, the largest number of labor disputes filed from year to year is disputes about labor remuneration. According to the author, this is caused by the imperfection of the norms of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation concerning guarantees in this sphere and, as a result, difficulties in law enforcement, which in turn entails a lack of uniformity of judicial practice.

Restoration of Rights on a Lost Order Securities: An out-of-Court Procedure or Call-Out Proceedings?

The article is devoted to the legal regulation of the procedural procedure for the restoration of rights on lost documentary securities with an emphasis on their type as order securities. The author analyzes civil and procedural legislation, the opinions of scientists and the judicial practice of courts of general jurisdiction and arbitration courts on the issue of the applicability of call-out proceedings to the restoration of rights on a lost order security. The author comes to the conclusion about the inconsistency of civil and procedural legislation in the issue of the procedure for restoring rights to a lost order security, which is clearly confirmed by judicial enforcement. The amendments introduced in 2013 to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation to this procedure have been interpreted ambiguously and inconsistently for ten years, there is no unity in understanding the procedure for restoring rights under such documents by the courts, which cannot but affect the effectiveness of justice related to the protection of the rights of persons who have lost an order security. In conclusion, it is concluded that the identified inconsistency in the legal regulation of the procedure for restoring rights on a lost order security needs to be eliminated, but before the relevant legislative changes, explanations are needed from the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the applicability of summoning proceedings and the ratio of the provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 148 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and Chapter 34 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The methodological basis of the article consists of general scientific (analysis, synthesis, analogy, description, system) and private scientific methods (comparative legal, formal legal).

On Significant Violations of the Law that Influenced the Outcome of the Case

The paper examines debatable issues of content when considering in cassation proceedings caused by incorrect application of significant violations of the criminal law and significant violations of the criminal procedural law that influenced the outcome of the case. The types of violations of criminal and criminal procedural laws that are recognized by the courts as significant and influencing the outcome of the criminal case are shown. It is substantiated that the grounds established in the law for the court of cassation for canceling and changing a sentence that has entered into legal force do not contain any uncertainty and are interpreted uniformly by courts of general jurisdiction. Identifying significant violations of the criminal and criminal procedural law that influenced the outcome of the case, the cassation court is obliged to check if lower courts comply with the requirements of the criminal procedural law on establishing the factual circumstances of the criminal case, the requirements of the procedural form, the correct application of the criminal law when qualifying the actions of the defendant, the requirements of the criminal the law on the fairness of the imposed punishment, the correctness of resolving issues of compensation for damage caused by a crime, the correctness of determining the type and amount of punishment, the type and regime of a correctional institution, fulfillment of the requirements for a court decision, etc. It is concluded that checking the legality of a sentence or other court decision involves checking its validity, motivation and fairness, without which it is impossible to determine the correct application of criminal and criminal procedural law by the courts.

Foreign Experience of Prosecutor's Control over Legislative Implementation in Tax Authorities

The state of affairs in the tax sphere is significantly influenced by such factors as the imperfection and inconsistency of the current legislation regulating the procedure for taxation and granting benefits, as well as bringing violators to justice; insufficient analysis of judicial and investigative practice due to the small number of criminal cases of this category sent to court; inconsistency of decisions taken by arbitration courts and courts of general jurisdiction on claims of legal entities and individuals against tax authorities; the ill-considered, legislative lack of regulation of the system of activities of regulatory and law enforcement agencies in every area.

Принятие решения о нежелательности пребывания (проживания) иностранного гражданина или лица без гражданства в Российской Федерации как административно-предупредительная мера, применяемая при обеспечении миграционной безопасности Российской Федерации

Тhe article notes the meaning of administrative and preventive measures in the field of migration. The author’s definition of administrative and preventive measures aimed at ensuring migration security is formulated. The decision-making on the undesirability of the stay (residence) of a foreign citizen or a stateless person in the Russian Federation as a comprehensive measure affecting the provision of migration security of the Russian Federation is analyzed. The role of federal executive authorities in the application of this preventive measure in the field of migration (Rospotrebnadzor, Federal Medical and Biological Agency (FMBA), FSIN, etc.), as well as their officials is reflected. The decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and other federal courts of general jurisdiction on the application of measures of state coercion against foreigners are used in this work. It is concluded that the decision on the undesirability of stay (residence, as a measure of administrative warning is applied not in connection with the administrative offense committed and not in relation to the offender, but in connection with the circumstances of the present time, entailing the emergence of a real or potential threat to migration security and the safety of life, health of citizens, in order to prevent violations of the law and causing possible harm.

Official Statistics and Assessment of the State of the Fight against Crime in 2012–2022

Taking into account enormous importance of reliable initial criminological information for criminal policy, the paper examines the issue of reflecting an objective picture of the fight against crime in official statistics. Using the method of statistical analysis, the author examines: the number of registered crimes in Russia (2012–2022); reported cases of administrative offenses in courts of general jurisdiction (2012–2022); the number of convicts in Russia, the number of individuals with criminal history on record or with an outstanding conviction, their share in © Маслов В. А., 2024the total number of convicts, the structure and proportion of convicts in the context of committed crimes (2012– 2022); the number and proportion of convicted persons in correctional colonies for adults, depending on the age at the time of the crime, as well as taking into account the repetition of imprisonment (2012–2021); crimes of persons serving their sentences in educational colonies for minors (2012–2021). A number of the studied indicators are presented in the form of diagrams for clarity. Attention is paid to reducing the number of registered crimes while increasing appeals to the internal affairs bodies. The paper highlights as a matter of concern the fact of a consistently high proportion of grave and especially grave crimes in the crime structure, the fact of an increase in both short-term (up to 1 year) and long-term (over 10 years) terms of imprisonment of persons serving sentences in correctional colonies for adults. Attention is focused on the problems of a disproportionate decrease in the number of persons held in educational colonies for minors convicted of rape, an increase in the proportion of minors convicted of murder. In conclusion, the author provides a number of recommendations for the correct work with information relevant to the fight against crime, highlights the most important statistical trends, both positively and negatively characterizing the criminal situation in Russia.

The Right of the Consumer to Protect Personal Data and its Implementation

Relevance. The article discusses ways to protect the personal data of the consumer as their subject. It is noted that the risk of violation of the rights of this category of citizens has increased significantly in the era of digitalization. Legislative novelties proposed by the scientific community concerning the recognition of personal data as a personal non-property good are analyzed. Based on the generalization of judicial practice, approaches to assessing the illegality of processing, distribution or use of other people's personal data in decisions on claims for recognition of such actions as violating the provisions of civil legislation are shown. The purpose of the study is to supplement scientific knowledge about ways to protect consumer personal data and improve the quality of law enforcement practice when considering claims in cases of this category. Objectives: to analyze the practice of the Constitutional, Supreme Courts of the Russian Federation, courts of general jurisdiction in cases of consumer personal data protection and to identify problems related to the implementation of this right.Methodology. When writing the work, methods of analysis and synthesis, system-analytical, documentary and formal legal methods were used. The results of the study are theoretical and applied in nature and are aimed at finding optimal solutions for the effective implementation of the consumer's right to personal data protection. The issue of legislative recognition of a person's personal data as a personal intangible good is raised in order to ensure proper restoration of violated rights.The conclusions made in the article, as well as the proposals made, are aimed at continuing scientific developments on the stated topic, are of a debatable nature and allow for a uniform way to resolve problems arising in the implementation of the consumer's right to personal data protection. Conclusion and proposals are aimed at continuing scientific developments on the stated topic, are of a debatable nature and allow solving problems arising in the implementation of the consumer's right to personal data protection in a uniform way.

Принцип прямого действия Конституции РФ при рассмотрении уголовных дел

The article is devoted to problematic issues of applying the principle of constitutional law related to the direct effect of the Constitution of the Russian Federation when considering criminal cases by courts of general jurisdiction. The subject of the study is the principle of direct action of the Basic Law, doctrinal sources devoted to the topic under discussion, the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, issues of legal consciousness of judges. Scientific provisions on the formation of comprehensive measures aimed at eliminating identified shortcomings in law enforcement practice are presented.

Constitutional and legal principles of ensuring the independence of judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine

The independence of judges constitutes one of the fundamental components of the legal system in any democratic country. Within the legal framework of Ukraine, the constitutional and legal principles guaranteeing the independence of judges, specifically those of the Constitutional Court, represent a key element of the legal structure ensuring the stability of the rule of law, the protection of human rights, and the development of the rule-of-law state.
 It is emphasized that the guarantees of the independence of courts of general jurisdiction and bodies of constitutional justice play a critical role in ensuring legal stability and protecting judges from political or external influences. The independence of judges in performing their functions is crucial in upholding the principles of the rule of law and justice. Therefore, it is vital to ensure an effective mechanism to safeguard this independence from any external pressure or influence, regardless of the sphere of jurisdiction.
 It has been identified that one potential drawback associated with expressing a separate opinion of a judge of the Constitutional Court could be the blurring of the clarity of the adopted decision. Separate opinions generate significant interest among scholars and practicing lawyers, with the texts of such opinions often utilized in the educational process of legal institutions and drawing attention from judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine during the consideration of similar cases. As these documents contain doctrinal views on various aspects of cases reviewed by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, they become the subject of additional analysis and consideration.
 It is noted that ensuring the independence of judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine is based on a comprehensive system of constitutional and legal guarantees aimed at ensuring their independence in resolving important constitutional issues and preserving the principles of the rule-of-law state in Ukraine.
 Moreover, Ukraine, as a participant in international treaties and organizations, is obliged to adhere to international standards in the field of justice and guaranteeing judicial independence. Consequently, means of protecting the rights of judges of the Constitutional Court are developed and adapted to international normative documents.