European Judges Research Articles

Decoding Judicial Cross-Citations: How Do European Judges Engage with Foreign Case Law?

Decoding Judicial Cross-Citations: How Do European Judges Engage with Foreign Case Law?

How conservative groups fight liberal values and try to ‘moralize’ the European Court of Human Rights

AbstractThis paper analyses the growing litigation before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) by conservative European Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs) who exploit legal opportunities and other advocacy tactics. These actors oppose the liberal insistence on permissive individual freedom, minority rights and mandatory vaccination. Instead, they promote the sanctity of life, traditional values and harsh terrorism penalties. In this study we show that conservative legal mobilisation is not only related to litigation but also covers the execution of certain ECtHR judgments and the nomination of some European judges. We analyse their tactics using legal and sociolegal methodology (interviews, analysis of legal documents and jurisprudence and network analysis) to characterise their influence on the European human rights system and the reactions of the Council of Europe. We reflect on the moral values claimed by conservative NGOs and their liberal counterparts by analysing how powerful private actors, driven by material and moral interests, take creative initiatives that shape or reshape case law and its politicisation through alliances with so-called ‘illiberal’ and ‘populist’ states.

THE ROLE OF THE SUPREME COURT IN ENSURING THE OBSERVANCE AND RESPECT FOR THE RULE OF LAW

The rule of law is the cornerstone of modern democratic legal systems and an important condition for their continued existence. At the legislative level, it has been recognised in Ukraine since the adoption of the Constitution of Ukraine in 1996, and the establishment of democratic values continues to this day. This scientific paper investigates the development and establishment of the rule of law through judicial proceedings to attain its purpose of delivering justice. In most developed European countries, there is a well-accepted legal tradition whereby constitutional jurisdiction takes precedence over general jurisdiction, thus making the Constitutional Court superior to the Supreme Court. However, the legal reality in Ukraine demonstrates a contrary scenario. As shown by the author, the Ukrainian approach, while highly distinctive, does not contradict international principles about the formation of the rule of law through the courts. Furthermore, the principal legislative provisions completely match the criteria of international and European law. Nevertheless, the study concludes that the excessive activity of the Supreme Court appears to be a significant drawback due to its overly extensive case law. For instance, during the first half of 2023, the Supreme Court heard a total of 63 406 procedural appeals and cases, including 5 433 in the sphere of criminal justice and 7 174 taking into account cases and materials not heard the previous year (Верховний Суд, Аналіз здійснення правосуддя). That is the reason why the Ukrainian legal system is confronted with the issue of defining legal certainty, which is one of the key characteristics of sustainable and democratic justice (Consultative Council of European Judges, 2017). The article identifies that not only is this problem currently unresolved by the Ukrainian legislature, but it also emphasises the importance and necessity of defining the status of case law in the country, as well as the influence of the Supreme Court on ensuring the rule of law. According to the author, there are several options available to overcome these challenges which must be handled expeditiously in light of the ongoing war and Ukraine's eventual membership in the European Union. Based on the results of this article, it is proposed to adopt two legislative proposals. First, case law should be recognised as a source of law, namely the legal conclusions established in Supreme Court rulings. Second, these judgments must be published in the determined form to be regarded as a source of law. To clearly identify the Supreme Court decisions containing legal conclusions and serving as a source of law, the study proposes a separate publication of these judgements from others that do not hold such status. For example, they could be published in dedicated documents/collections, etc. specifically designed for this purpose. Moreover, the author concludes that such an instrument already exists, despite the fact that it is not officially recognised as such. According to the results of this research, the Supreme Court's reviews and digests of case law are an illustration of this particular tool.

Access to justice through the prism of uniformity of judicial practice in Ukraine

Different perception of relatively new concepts is one of the challenges of implementation of the new terminology in Ukraine. So, the purpose of this article is to study the interconnection of two concepts – the ‘access to justice’ and ‘uniformity of judicial practice’, – keeping in mind the European standards set in Rule of Law Report, CCEJ Opinion No. 20 and in ECtHR case law. Both concepts were in the focus of a number of studies during last decade, however, the interconnections between them was not considered specifically. Also, many publications confirmed that the critical approach to the past (both Soviet as well as pre-Soviet, meaning imperial Russian) was not predominant; examples of this is quoting the Rule of Law Report, Consultative Council of European Judges Opinion No. 20 (2017) and ECtHR jurisprudence alongside works of Russian imperial jurists thus many Ukrainian legal scholars were eager to find “deeper roots” in many modern concepts in the works of Russian scholars of XIX-XX century. Therefore, it is crucial that such concepts as ‘access to justice’ are used correctly. The findings show that the uniformity of judicial practice by ensuring stability and predictability, promotes access to justice, especially in so-called “classic” cases, regulated by longstanding legislation. However, modern world and life in it is quite dynamic, social relationships constantly develop and new legal disputes (due to technological progress or caused by the Russian armed aggression against Ukraine) arise for which there is no case law at all. After the full scale invasion an obvious question arises about how the judicial practice will develop to ensure access to justice in new category of cases, both civil (i.e. regarding compensation of damage caused to the real estate) and criminal, compared to those that were happened since 2014 and were classified as terrorist or general criminal, although some of them had signs of war crimes. In this context, the leadership role of the Supreme Court is important, given its mandate to ensure the uniformity of judicial practice and keeping in mind the dynamic character of the legal relations.

The role of judicial argumentation in reforming of Ukraine’s judiciary: EU membership perspectives

The article reflects the impact of judicial argumentation on the process of reforming the judicial system of Ukraine during Ukraine’s integration into the European Union. In addition, the article points out some structural elements of the influence of judicial argumentation in the course of Ukraine’s EU-integration.This paper emphasizes the essential participation of European institutions in raising the quality level of judicial argumentation in Ukraine. These institutions can be divided in two big groups: EU-based organizations (European Commission, Eurobarometer, European Commission for the efficiency of justice (CEPEJ), Court of Justice of the European Union) and the organizations in the Council of Europe (European Court of Human Rights, the Venice Commission and the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE)). Moreover, the author gives examples when Ukrainian judicial institutions raise the need to enhance the quality of judicial argumentation.

The quality of judicial decisions in cases of bullying in professional educational institutions

The positions of scholars on the concept of “judicial decision quality” have been examined. Criteria for a high-quality judicial decision include justice, timeliness, justification, clarity, clear language, and an accessible style. The researchers also distinguish between objective (legal training, legal experience, qualification requirements for judicial candidates, opportunities for practicing judges to improve their skills, mechanisms for monitoring the work of judges, unrestricted public access to judicial decisions, the role of legal science in analysing judicial decisions) and subjective (the judge’s personality, salary, social guarantees, working conditions and ability to organise their work) factors that affect the quality of a judicial decision. The summaries of judicial practice and analytical work on the application of the Supreme Court’s legislation focus on the following requirements for the quality of drafting and execution of court decisions in cases on administrative offences: execution of a judicial decision with strict compliance by the court with the requirements established by law to its form and content, compliance with the legislation on the language of legal proceedings.
 Normative legal acts aimed at developing a unified approach to understanding the quality of judicial decisions have been analysed. Requirements for determining the quality of a judicial decisiont are considered in the Conclusion of the Advisory Council of European Judges No. 11 (2008) on the quality of judicial decisions, including external environment – legislation and economic and social context (legislation, resources, actors in the judicial system and legal education), internal environment - professionalism, procedural rules, case consideration and decision-making (professionalism of the judge, procedural rules and case management, case consideration in court, elements inextricably linked to decision-making).
 Judicial decisions in cases of bullying in vocational education institutions adopted in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offences are considered with regard to the presence or absence of requirements for the quality of judicial decisions. It has been established that a certain number of judgements do not have the components of judicial quality.
 Shortcomings of the current legislation on administrative offences have been highlighted. In particular, the outdated provisions of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offences; the absence of an article that would provide for the adoption of rulings by courts in the name of Ukraine in cases of administrative offences, etc.
 The article analyses the judicial decisions made by courts in the period from 2019 to 2021 in cases on administrative offences involving bullying of participants in the educational process in vocational education institutions in terms of their clarity (comprehensibility) and validity. It has been highlighted that most judicial decisions contain an exhaustive list of evidence in the case; the courts comply with the requirement to find out whether an administrative offence has been committed, whether the person is guilty of committing it, whether he or she is subject to administrative liability, etc..

The Court and the Sleeping Beauty 2.0: Filling the Contractual Gap, or Making Valid Consumer Contracts to the Detriment of the Non-consumer?

Abstract This paper is a critical presentation of the CJEU case-law on UCTD, with particular reference to the non-filling of the contractual gap resulting from the unfairness test by applying ‘dispositive’ law or supplementary interpretation. The result contradicts the principles and methods of national civil law: not only does the balance in the contract suffer under the position the CJEU has chosen, as it creates alternated forms of balance of interests rather than the identical ones sought by the parties, but moreover, the increasing number of different cases imposes an ambiguous approach on the CJEU, since European judges have to ask on a case-by-case basis what the best interest of the consumer is. By adopting such a functional approach in favour of the substantive justice of the contract, the ECJ decided with questionable results with regard to national civil law, while methodological legal questions as to whether the contract should stand as it is, following the unfairness test, or whether a supplementation of the contract should take place are still open. It is therefore of critical importance to achieve an optimal combination between a fair balance of the contract and effective consumer protection.423

Judge’s Right to Freely Express Own Views in the Context of Establishing the Authority of the Judicial Power in Society

The author of the article has studied peculiarities of exercising the right to freely express own views by a judge in the context of establishing the authority of the judicial power in society, taking into account the provisions set forth in the Consultative Council of European Judges Opinion No. 25 dated from December 2, 2022 on the freedom of expression of judges. It has been determined that the right to free expression of own views is the right of a person to freely, without any influence, express own thoughts, judgments, beliefs in any form, which are formed on the basis of established knowledge, ideas, outlook and worldview about certain objects, phenomena, facts, etc., to assess them, in particular, to give support, criticism, characteristics. It has been established that the Consultative Council of European Judges adheres to a broad view of the personal scope of the right to freedom of expression of judges as an individual right, noting that the institutional and state nature of the judge’s position gives an ambivalent nature to the freedom of expression of a judge. It has been argued that the ambivalent nature of the freedom of expression of a judge means the simultaneous coexistence of judge’s conflicting opinions, assessments, etc., as well as the obligation to find the necessary balance between private interests and the interests of society in ensuring the authority of the judicial power. The ambivalent nature of the freedom of expression of a judge determines the establishment of additional restrictions on exercising the right to freely express own views, in addition to the general restrictions established by the Constitution of Ukraine, the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The CJEU Opinion No. 25 (2022) on the freedom of expression of judges singles out the restrictions of freedom of expression of views / controversial cases in regard to statements related to litigation; statements regarding public debates; statements regarding matters of interest to the judicial power as an institution; public criticism of the judicial power / colleagues of judges; current political mandate / former political mandate. It has been proved that the main criteria for imposing a legitimate restriction on the right to freedom of expression of views are rule of law and necessity in a democratic society. Such approaches are used by the European Court of Human Rights when hearing cases om violation of a judge’s right to free expression of own views, including in the context of a judge’s public criticism of legislative reforms related to the judicial power, or information on issues related to the judicial power, or criticism of judges who are colleagues. Key words: judge’s right to freely express own views, judicial power, authority of the judicial power, restrictions of the constitutional right, ambivalent nature of the freedom to express own views by a judge, judicial ethics.

LEGAL TERMINOLOGY TRANSLATION IN THE TRAINING OF LAW STUDENTS: DIFFICULTIES

The article presents certain difficulties in translating legal terms in training future lawyers. The translation of legal terminology is a comprehensive process that involves knowledge of grammar, common and legal vocabulary, words and phrases of Latin origin, and others. Definitions of «legal terminology», «legal term» and «legal translation» are highlighted. It is stated that legal translation requires a translator’s awareness of the laws, culture, history, national traditions of the source language and the target language in order to reproduce the source information of the target language adequately and fully. The importance of translation dictionaries of legal terminology is emphasized. It is highlighted that information in the third edition of «Documents of the Consultative Council of European Judges» is available in English and Ukrainian. The educational tutorial “Comparative Judicial Law” in the Ukrainian language, which contains information for a full understanding of the judicial system for translating terms has been analyzed. The difficulties of rendering words of Latin origin, passive voice, and clichés are analyzed on the basis of the court case «Francisco Cunanan Pamintuan, Petitioner v. Department of the Navy». It should be remembered that Latin words and phrases are often not translated. The court-presented examples may be used without modification, however, it is advisable to explain or translate them when using them in foreign language classes. One has revealed the methods of translation of legal terms-realities, which are non-equivalent lexical units, as it is difficult to reflect the national identity of a certain country and to find an equivalent that conveys stylistic and semantic nuances in the text of the source language. It has been made clear how important it is to understand the laws, customs, and culture of both one’s own country and the native speaker’s country. It is emphasized that lawyers who work with foreign clients or help Ukrainians who have partners abroad must understand linguistic problems and know legal terms in the process of communication. It is noted that a promising area for the education of law students is the compilation of explanatory and translation dictionaries, which will also help to further lexicography.

Judicial self-government in Ukraine (in the context of European standards)

The relevance of the issue of proper functioning of judicial self-government, its important role in protecting the independence of the judiciary and the professional interests of judges is not in doubt today. In this article, the author analyzed the organizational forms of judicial self-government in Ukraine, in accordance with the current legislation of our country. At the same time, the article pays special attention to the recommendations of the Advisory Council of European Judges, which analyzed the organization and empowerment of judicial councils in various European countries. It also provided its recommendations on the composition of such councils of judges, as well as an approximate list of powers that should be given to such councils. The article draws attention to the existence of associations of judges, which also stand for the protection of the professional interests of judges and the protection of the independence of the judiciary. The author concludes that the national legislation on judicial self-government is sufficiently in line with European standards on this issue, but warned that in case of legislative changes, or improvement of this institution, care should be taken of legislative and practical reform of the judiciary. The introduction of inconsistent legislative changes is otherwise detrimental to the judiciary and its perception by civil society. Key words: Judicial Council, Judicial Self-Government, Independence of Judges.

Criminal Procedure and Forensic Aspects of Mutual Legal Assistance between States in Criminal Matters: Experience of Ukraine and the Republic of Azerbaijan

This article, through the description of real experiences, reveals some of the obstacles that arise when applying the international, national, and domestic laws of the Republic of Azerbaijan and Ukraine in the fight against crimes of an international character, and offers alternatives to address them. International legal assistance between States in criminal cases is provided in accordance with international agreements. The instruments of cooperation in the field of mutual legal assistance between States in criminal matters are well known to European judges and prosecutors. However, experience shows that post-Soviet countries have been reluctant to use mutual legal assistance in criminal matters because of the practical problems that often arise. The solutions to these problems are not only found in national or international legal texts and regulations, directives, or conventions. It is concluded that legal assistance among States in criminal cases is essential to extradite offenders facing criminal charges or to execute court sentences, to extradite persons, to transfer convicted persons to serve their sentences and to seize, search for and confiscate the proceeds of crime.

O nieprzydatności testu Ástráðsson wobec prezydenckiej prerogatywy – glosa do wyroku Naczelnego Sądu Administracyjnego z dnia 4 listopada 2021 r. (III FSK 3626/21)

On the Inappropriateness of the Ástráðsson Test against the Presidential Prerogative: A Gloss to the Judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of November 4, 2021 (III FSK 3626/21) The Supreme Administrative Court in the commented judgment unfortunately made an unsuccessful attempt to carry out the Ástráðsson test with regard to a person appointed by the President at the request of a politically subordinate (in violation of the Constitution) National Council of the Judiciary. Failure to do so is a kind of paradox of the commented judgment. A significant part of it relates to supranational and international law. „Europeanness” is ubiquitous in the judgment and was additionally included in its thesis. According to its content, assessors and judges are European judges. However, this otherwise catchy statement is not confirmed by the application of the judgment of the ECtHR to the assessment of an judge. On the constitutional level, the judgment also deserves criticism. The court considered it justified to refer to the judicature of the Supreme Administrative Court, the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Tribunal, referring to some extent to the presidential prerogative of appointing judges at the request of the National Council of the Judiciary, in order to reach a conclusion about the almost „magically healing” effect of the presidential act of appointment to the office of judge. The NSA also did not comment on the total deprivation of any real influence of the judiciary on the nomination procedure. Therefore, one should ask what is the balancing of the legislative and executive powers with the judiciary power absent from the National Council of the Judiciary?

ДОКУМЕНТИ ОРГАНІВ РАДИ ЄВРОПИ ЯК ОСНОВА РЕФОРМУВАННЯ ПРОКУРАТУРИ В УКРАЇНІ

The article emphasizes that regardless of the type of model of the law enforcement system that operates in foreign countries, the prosecutor's office plays a special role in them. The purpose of the article is to establish which documents of the Council of Europe bodies have laid the normative and theoretical basis for the reform of the prosecutor's office in Ukraine in the context of European integration, and to determine the relevant provisions of these acts. Based on the content of the European convention, the scientific position is supported that the activity of the prosecutor's office is an effective means of legal protection in case of violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms. An analysis of such documents of the Council of Europe, as: Bordeaux Declaration of 18.11.2009; PACE Recommendations (№ 1604 (2003), № 1722 (2005), № 1755 (2010)); Recommendations of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to member states (№ 19 (2000), № 11 (2012)); PACE Conclusion № 190 (1995); Opinion of the Advisory Council of European Judges № 18 (2015); Council of Europe Action Plans for Ukraine. It has been established that the prosecutor's office is called upon to play a significant role in ensuring the security of society, the rule of law, human rights and freedoms. It was stated that the PACE pays considerable attention to the organization of the prosecutor's office in the context of the functioning of democratic institutions. Based on the analysis of the listed acts of the CoE bodies, it is concluded that general supervision as a function of the prosecutor's office contradicts European standards, as these bodies are empowered to implement it significantly in excess of those required in a democracy. At the same time, it was found that the relevant European experience is not unambiguous, the scientific position is supported that the supervision of compliance with the law in a democratic state does not violate its democratic character. It was stated that in various aspects of the organization and activity of the prosecutor’s office in the EU countries such a mandatory requirement as the independence of the prosecutor’s office from the legislative, executive and judicial authorities finds its expression.

Mutual legal assistance on criminal matters: when theory meets practice - a real story

The instruments of cooperation between different judicial authorities are well known among European judges and prosecutors, and knowledge regarding how they operate has been widely spread via courses and seminars. However, experience shows that judges and prosecutors are reluctant to use them given the practical problems they often entail. The solutions to such problems are not found in the texts of Directives or Conventions, and therefore often, investigating authorities do not know how to proceed in order to be able to conclude an investigation and/or start a trial. This article, by recounting a real experience, illustrates some of the obstacles which are so alien to legislators, and proposes solutions and/or alternatives to speed up requests for assistance.

Justice in the Covid-19 era Through the Prism of Judicial Power

The work is devoted to identifying the main problems in the field of the principle of legal proceedings in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. The research applies the formal-legal, historical and legal, comparative and modeling methodology. The order and issues to be considered are as follows: in the first section, we will consider the challenges and threats to justice that emerged during the Covid-19 pandemic. In the second section, we will see the judicial experience during the pandemic in the context of the basic principles of the judiciary. In the third section, we examine the application of organizational and procedural principles of the judiciary during the pandemic crisis. In the final fourth section, we will assess the role of international judicial institutions and government bodies in optimizing the administration of justice in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. As a result of the work, emphasizing the vulnerability of the judicial system and justice standards, the authors support the expansion of exchange of experience and cooperation not only at the state level but also at the level of professional communities of judges, in particular with the members and judges of the European Commission for the Effectiveness of Justice, the Advisory Council of European Judges, and the European human rights courts.

From Backlogs to Quality Assurance. The Development of Law Clerk Units at Norwegian Courts

The <em>Consultative Council</em> of European Judges (CCJE) approves of the role of law clerks assisting judges in their decision making but cautions against clerks replacing judges. In this article we put CCJE’s caution to a test and study law clerks at the Norwegian Supreme Court and the Borgarting and the Gulating courts of appeal, the country’s two largest courts of appeal. The general pattern for all three courts is that the pretext for hiring clerks changes from backlog problems to quality assurance, that clerks become organized in separate units, that the number of tasks performed by clerks increases, and that women constitute an outsized presence in the clerk units. The growth in clerks contributes to institutionalizing courts. We conclude that clerks perform tasks of the judges, that to some degree they replace judges, that clerks influence decision making, but that clerks have not become judges or make final decisions.

The Role of the Supreme Court in the Mechanism of Ensuring the Sustainability and Unity of Judicial Practice: Some Aspects

One of the means of ensuring the stability and unity of judicial practice is the decision of the Supreme Court, which deviates from the conclusion on the application of the rule of law in such legal relations. The current criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine clearly regulates the procedure for such a derogation, which is generally in line with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and international recommendations in this area. However, this procedure has immanent significant features that require scientific analysis of the current procedural form in this segment with regard to its adequacy to the needs of ensuring the right of everyone to a fair trial and society's expectations for reasonable predictability of court decisions. In view of this, within the framework of this study, the categories “unity” and “sustainability” of judicial practice as a subject of provision by the Supreme Court was carried out. To achieve this purpose, the authors used a set of modern general and special legal methods. The study considers the procedural order for the Supreme Court to deviate from the conclusion on the application of the rule of law in such legal relations; the legal nature of the issue of the hierarchy of legal positions of the Supreme Court is analysed. It is established that the key idea embodied by the legislator in the statutory model of the procedure for deviating from the opinion on the application of the rule of law is that the possibility of such a deviation from the opinion, depending on the composition of the court in which it was adopted and determines the "higher degree of significance" of such a conclusion and its application in further judicial practice. These areas were studied with the consideration of the recommendations of the Advisory Council of European Judges, as well as the relevant practice of the Supreme Court

The Ambiguous Relationship Between the EU and its Internal Borders

&#x0D; &#x0D; &#x0D; The free movement of EU citizens within the Union reveals the ambiguous relationship between the EU and borders. While the functioning of the internal market is essentially based on freedom of movement and implies the elimination of borders as barriers to trade, the freedom of movement of the European citizen remains defined largely within the conceptual framework of borders, since nationality is a prime requirement for European citizenship. Inside the EU, as this article highlights, borders are necessary and problematic at same time. The Court has played with the concept of borders to address these ambiguities with a view to deepening integration. The conclusion is that if the Court has been able to effectively remove obstacles related to internal borders concerning the free movement of goods and the movement of active economic persons, such has not been the case for the free movement of European citizens, economically inactive. It follows from the division of competences and the case law of the European judges that solidarity remains intrinsically linked to nationality and therefore inevitably leads to the re-establishment of borders and the separation of peoples. This demonstrates the resistance of the “paradigm of a European market citizenship”. By revaluing nationality in the context of the enjoyment of the rights linked to citizenship, the European Court of Justice could hamper the integration process by renationalising the individual and establishing new borders.

Escenarios heteroglósicos en las sentencias del Tribunal Supremo de España y del Tribunal de Justicia de la UE. El caso de los conectores condicionales complejos

&lt;p&gt;This study deals with the different distribution of Complex Conditional Connectors (CCCs) in a monolingual comparable corpus made up of judicial rulings in Spanish delivered by two high courts, one Spanish (Tribunal Supremo de España, TSE) and one European (Court of Justice of the EU, CJEU). After observing the logic functions and the normalised frequency of such connectors in both subcorpora and in a comparison corpus of standard Spanish, the asymetric distribution of these conditional operators in the rulings of these two judicial authorities is highlighted. The Appraisal Theory is brought to bear in order to interpret the results, emphasizing that the Spanish and the European judges negotiate the interpersonal meaning of their rulings differently, through an idiosyncratic use of CCCs. In fact, both courts show dissimilar heteroglossic positioning, opening up or closing the argumentative space to possible dialogistic alternatives in a divergent way.&lt;/p&gt;

Current Judicial Reform in Ukraine and in Poland: Constitutional and European Legal Aspect in the Context of Independent Judiciary

Since the Revolution of Dignity in 2014, Ukraine has been carrying out revision and bringing to conformity with international standards of legislation in terms of judicial system and legal procedure. On 2 June, 2016 the law amending the Constitution of Ukraine in the part of justice, as well as the Law of Ukraine ‘On Judicial System and Status of Judges’ was adopted. On 13 July, 2017 a new Law of Ukraine ‘On the Constitutional Court of Ukraine’ was adopted. In the middle of December 2017, the election to the Supreme Court finished and its new composition was formed, at the same time the revision of all procedural codes took place. However, one on the main problems of the judiciary in Ukraine has been the problem of the judicial independence as a whole and in the part of independence of judges. The subject of this research is the question of judicial independence in the context of respective international standards. Similarly, the aim of part of the paper about the judicial system of Poland is to show the legislative changes regarding the judiciary which took place in Poland recently, i.e. within the last 3 years. As the ongoing changes of functioning, competence and organization of the Constitutional Tribunal, common courts, the Supreme Court and the National Council of Judiciary have been observed and commented upon by various European institutions, they will be shown in relation to the common European standards regarding the judicial independence presented in opinions and reports of Venice Commission, European Network of Councils of Judiciary and Consultative Council of European Judges.