INTERNATIONAL AND NATIONAL LEGAL MECHANISMS OF JUDICIAL LIABILITY IN THE CONDITIONS OF ECONOMIC GLOBALISATION OF MODERN SOCIETY
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Abstract
The subject matter of the study is the conceptual, theoretical, empirical, methodological and applied foundations of international and national legal mechanisms of judicial liability in the context of economic globalisation of modern society. Methodology. The present study employed a combination of general scientific and special legal methodologies. Through meticulous analysis, the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of the economic and legal essence of an independent and impartial judiciary as the nation's sole arbiter of justice were systematically delineated. The synthesis yielded a comprehensive overview of the legal framework governing the judicial accountability of judges across diverse legal systems, with particular consideration for each system's economic level of development. The employment of a comparative legal methodology has facilitated the identification of both common and distinctive characteristics in both international and national legislation. This is a scientific development that is indicative of the legal mechanism for holding judges to disciplinary liability. The formal-legal method established the foundations for formulating conclusions regarding the effectiveness of existing national legal regimes for holding judges accountable. The purpose of the present article is to determine the specific features of international and national legal mechanisms of judicial liability in the context of economic globalisation in modern societies. The results of the study show that the existing international legal mechanism of judicial liability developed by international institutions is quite effective and promising for implementation within the framework of national legal regimes, and the national mechanism of judicial liability needs to be improved both in terms of procedure and means of its implementation in connection with the economic development of society. Conclusion. The establishment of functional indicators of the judiciary has been undertaken, which are convergent in combination with economic indicators of the population's well-being, conditions for opening one's own business, ensuring financial and banking stability, GDP growth, the level of development of relevant sectors of industry and the economic sphere as a whole, etc. Among the indicators that reproduce the productivity of all three branches of government, the following are highlighted: the government efficiency index - the executive branch, the legislation quality index - the legislative branch, the rule of law index - the judiciary. A direct dependence of the economic development and rule of law indices has been revealed, since under the condition of ensuring the latter, there is a guarantee of the harmonious existence of all sectors of society, and conditions are created to prevent the emergence of existential threats to the national interests of the state, including the provision of human rights and freedoms. The mechanism for bringing judges to disciplinary responsibility has been established in accordance with international standards, including 1) a special procedure for bringing judges to disciplinary responsibility, which is defined by law; 2) the formation of an independent body that should consider such cases; 3) ensuring the right of a judge to participate in such procedure directly or through a representative, to exercise his right of defence and to express his opinion; 4) the right to appeal against the decision taken on the basis of the results of this procedure; 5) the exhaustiveness of the sanctions that can be applied and their proportionality. Within the framework of the national legal systems of the countries under consideration, the features of holding judges accountable in relation to their professional activities and for offences committed outside them are determined, which mediate the implementation of the content of the immunity and immunity of such officials. The procedure for holding judges criminally and disciplinarily liable is highlighted separately, and the reasons, grounds, procedure and subjects of the above-mentioned proceedings are determined, which indicates the special status of bodies that ensure the achievement of a social compromise in the influence of society on the judiciary, in combination with the construction of ensuring the immunity of judges.
How to Cite
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
judiciary, economic globalisation, rule of law index, index of economic freedom, international mechanism, national mechanism, judicial responsibility
Rikhter, V. V. (2020). Public Administration Independence of Judges in Ukraine. Legal science, Vol. 4(106), No. 2, p. 146–151.
Pivovar, I. V. (2014). Independence of Judges in the Context of Modern Legal Reforms. Scientific Bulletin of the International Humanitarian University. Series: Jurisprudence, Vol. 1 (10-1), p. 46–48.
Berch, V. V., Belov, D. M., & Bysaha, Y. M. (2023). Independence of Judges in the Context of Modern Legal Reforms. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod National University. Series: Law, Vol. 80(1), p. 102–106.
Uygur, G., & Gürgey, FIC (2022). 'Improve the Law' as a Judicial Duty on the Borderlines of Free Speech: Judges as Responsible Epistemic Agents. Krytyka Prawa-Niezalezne Studia nad Prawem, Vol. 14(4), p. 60–73.
Sánchez, ABB (2009). The Judiciary, Accountability, and Transition to Democracy in Spain. Foro Internacional, Vol. 49(4), p. 163–179.
Lawton, F. (1968). The role and responsibility of the judge. Medicine, Sci-ence, and the Law, Vol. 8(4), p. 243–248.
Santos, F. (2018). The Disciplinary Responsibility of Judges and Magistrates in Spain and Italy. Revista General de Derecho Publico Comparado, Vol. 23, p. 243–248.
Nikitin, S. (2014). Appointment of Judges and Legal Responsibility of Judges Guarantees of Independence in Russia. Culture of Judicial Independence: Rule of Law and World Peace, p. 411–418.
Kinski, L., Fromage, D., & Blauberger, M. (2024). Responsible judges or judging responsibilities? EU Court of Justice, Bundesverfassungsgericht and EU economic governance. Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 31(4), p. 1051–1074.
Flores Calvo, G. E. (2020). Judicial Accountability as External Control of the Decisions of the Supreme Court in the Chilean Legal Culture (PhD Thesis), Santiago: Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile.
Moufleh, YAA, Thneibat, MJM. (2017). The Disciplinary Responsibility for the Judge Pursuant to Law Jordanian Independence the Judgment. Journal of Law and Political Sciences, Vol. 14(2).
Ovcharenko, O. M. (2018). Legal responsibility of judges: issues of theory and practice. (Doctoral Dissertation). Odesa: National University "Odessa Law Academy".
Akhundova, K. (2024). Peculiarities of ensuring the responsibility and in-dependence of judges in the administration of justice (on the example of the Re-public of Azerbaijan, Ukraine and the Republic of Poland). South Ukrainian Law Journal, Vol. 2, p. 3–9.
Germak, K. O. (2024). Disciplinary responsibility of magistrates in the modern legal system: procedural aspects. Analytical and comparative jurisprudence, Vol. 4, p. 669–673.
Bondarchuk, R. A. (2021). Administrative and legal regulation of the procedure for bringing a judge to disciplinary responsibility (PhD Dissertation). Zaporizhzhia: Zaporizkyi natsionalnyi universytet.
Salenko, O. (2014). International standards in the field of judicial system and status of judges, their content and classification. National Legal Journal: Theory and Practice, June 2014, p. 263–269.
Indicators.GlobalEconomy.com (2024). The Indica-tors.GlobalEconomy.com. Available at: https://ru.theglobaleconomy.com/indicators_list.php
Rankings.GlobalEconomy.com (2024). The Rank-ings.GlobalEconomy.com. Available at: https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/wb_ruleoflaw/
Comparator.GlobalEconomy.com (2024). The Compara-tor.GlobalEconomy.com. Available at: https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/compare-countries/
Abdulmumin, Z. (2017). Factors Developing Countries Can Consider to Achieve Developed Economy Status (PhD Thesis), California Southern University.
Zhan, Y. L. (2010). The Administrative Performance Evaluation Study of the Weights to Strengthen the Rule of Law (PhD Thesis), Hunan Normal University (People's Republic of China).
Lane, JE (2011). Law and economics in the ASEAN +3 region: the rule of law deficit. International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 38(10), p. 847–857.
Yang, J. (2012). On Relationship between Rule of Law and Economic Growth. Korean Corruption Studies Review, Vol. 17(4), p. 81–105.
Shevchuk, V. O., Blikhar, M. M., Komarnytska, I. I., & Tataryn, N. M. (2020). Rule of Law and Economic Growth. Financial and Credit Activity-Problems of Theory and Practice, Vol. 1(32), p. 278–289.
Sill, K. L. (2010). Institutional Design and the Economy: Disentangling the Effects of Judicial Independence and Judicial Review on Economic Development (PhD Thesis), Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College.
Liu, X. K. (2011). The realization of judicial independence in taiwan and its implications on the mainland (PhD Thesis), Huazhong Normal University (People's Republic of China).
Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary (1985). Basic Princi-ples on the Independence of the Judiciary.
Recommendation №. R (94) 12 (1994). Recommendation №. R (94) 12 to Member States on the Independence, Efficiency and Role of Judges.
Council of Europe (1950). Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
Denysova, A. V., Blaga, A. B., Makovii, V. P., Kaliuzhna, Y. S. (2022). The Right to a Fair Trial: the ECtHR Case-Law and Its Implementation the Ukrainian Judiciary. Prawo i Więż, Vol. 40, p. 109–127.
European Charter (1998). European Charter on the Status of Judges.
Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (2006). The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct.
Kryzhanovskyi, V. Y. (2011). International Standards of Judicial Protection of Human Rights and Their Implementation in the System of Legal Protection in Ukraine. Current policy issues, Vol. 42, p. 116–123.
Babenko, H. O. (2021). European standards of the judiciary and the status of judges. Analytical and comparative jurisprudence, Vol. 4, p. 353–356.
Makovii, V., Kuznichenko, O., & Budyachenko, O. (2022). Status and prospects of the execution of judgments of the European Court Of Human Rights in Ukraine. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, Vol. 8 (3), p. 115–124.
Decision of the European Commission of Human Rights in the case of "X. v. Austria" (1982). The decision of the European Commission of Human Rights 06 October 1982 in the case of “X. v. Austria” on the inadmissibility of the ap-plication № 9295/81.
Decision of the European Commission of Human Rights in the case of "C. v. the United Kingdom" (1987). The decision of the European Commission of Human Rights of 07 October 1987 in the case of "C. v. the United Kingdom" on the inadmissibility of application № 11882/85.
Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of "Ringvold v. Norway" (2003). Decision of the European Court of Human Rights of 11 February 2003 in the case of "Ringvold v. Norway" of the application № 34964/97.
Sulaymanov, O. R. (2021). Disciplinary Responsibility of Judges: the In-ternational Standards and the National Legislation of Uzbekistan. Frontline Social Sciences and History Journal, Vol. 1(7), p. 1–13.
Romboli, R. (2022). Responsibility of the Judges, Jurisprudential Law and Legitimation of the Judicial Power in the Democratic State. Revista de Estudios Politicos, Vol. 198, p. 153–185.
Constitution of Ukraine (1996). The Constitution of Ukraine. Available at: http://surl.li/ykhqcb
The Constitution of Azerbaijan (1995). The Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan. Available at: https://president.az/en/pages/view/azerbaijan/constitution
The Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan on Courts and Judges (1997). The Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan on Courts and Judges. Available at: https://rm.coe.int/ct-legislation-azerbaijan-courts-and-judges/16806415cb
The Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan on the Judicial and Legal Council (2004). The Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan on the Judicial and Legal Council. Available at: https://legislationline.org/sites/default/files/documents/73/Azerbaijan_law_judicial_legal%20council_2004_am2014_en.pdf
The Law of Ukraine "On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges" (2016). The Official Bulletin of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (BVR), 2016. Available at: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-REF(2021)080-e
The Law of Ukraine "On the High Council of Justice" (2016). The Official Bulletin of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (BVR), 2016. Available at: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-REF(2020)067
Zubik, M., Wiacek, M. (2007). "On Controversial Issues concerning the Scope of Disciplinary Responsibility of the Judges of the Constitutional Tribunal" – A Polemic. Przeglad Sejmowy, Vol. 3, p. 69–84.
Hogg, P., & Amarnath, R. (2017). Why Judges Should Dissent. University Of Toronto Law Journal, Vol. 67(2), p. 126–141.
Bordalí, S. A. (2018). The unconstitutionality of the disciplinary regime of judges in Chile. Ius et Praxis, Vol. 24(2), p. 513–548.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.