文档介绍：该【att 1560678655参考-匠人 】是由【抱琴】上传分享，文档一共【10】页，该文档可以免费在线阅读，需要了解更多关于【att 1560678655参考-匠人 】的内容，可以使用淘豆网的站内搜索功能，选择自己适合的文档，以下文字是截取该文章内的部分文字，如需要获得完整电子版，请下载此文档到您的设备，方便您编辑和打印。.(Law),,YaroslavtheWiseNationalLawUniversity(Kharkiv,Ukraine)https:///-18--a000015Summary:.–?Justice.–.?–?4.?CriminalisticMeasuresofCounteractiontoMiscarriageofJustice.–5.??:fromthepointofviewofcriminallaw,?demonstrateproblemsofinvestigator,?certaincategoryofpersons,?analysisisaimedtodisclosetheproblemofcounteractiontomiscarriageofjusticein?:Counteraction,Measures,MiscarriageofJustice,InfluenceofJustice,CrimeAgainstJustice,IllegalVerdict,Judge,FairTrial,,judgment,orderorrulingofajudge(orjudges)inUkraineaccordingtoArticle375oftheCriminalCodeofUkraineispunishedbycustodialrestraintforuptofiveyears,‘a?medium-gravity’,alucrativeimpulseorotherpersonalinterestsofajudge(judges),mittedit,,(3)/2019Adeliberatelyunjustverdict,judgment,orderorrulingisacrimeagainstjustice(Chapter?XVIIIoftheCriminalCodeofUkraine).Indifferentcountriesresponsibilityforsuchactsisalsoenvisagedastheyareconsidered‘CrimesagainstJustice’or‘CrimesagainstAdministrationofJustice’.DifferentCriminalandPenalCodesofEuropeancountriesincludesimilararticlesthatprovidepunishmentofdeliberatelyunjustverdict,judgment,orderorrulingofajudge(miscarriageofjustice).Forexample,theCriminalCodeoftheRepublicofAlbania(),theCriminalCodeoftheRepublicofArmenia(),thePenalCodeofEstonia(§311),theCriminalCodeofGermany(),theCriminalCodeofLatvia(),theCriminalCodeoftheRepublicofMoldova(),theCriminalCodeoftheRepublicofSlovenia(),theCriminalCodeofSpain(),wherespecialcriminalproceedingsfordifferentcategoriesofperson,,theproblemofresponsibilityformiscarriageofjustice()becamerelevantonlyafter‘theEuromaidan’(2013-2014)and‘TheRevolutionofDignity’(2014),(2013-2017)ofthesentencesformiscarriageofjustice()hasdemonstrated,that11ofthemwereguiltyverdicts,and2–non-,thenumberofcriminalcasesisstartingtogrow(byeneral’sOfficeofUkraine1).TheRegisterofproceedingsofcrimesalsodemonstratesthistrend:in2016–therewere174offences;in2017–285;in2018–:6criminalcasesduring2016,3–during2017,and1–-trialinvestigation,judicialexaminationofmiscarriageofjusticeindicatetheneedfortheoreticaljustificationofinvestigators’,prosecutors’andjudges’,weshouldconsidersourcesincriminallaw,,whicharerelatedto:a)?drawingupalegalact(verdict,judgment,decision,rulingororder);b)itssigningbyajudge(judges);c)?pronouncing(disclosingittothetrialparticipants).3Therefore,the1See:eneral`sOfficeofUkraine,‘StatisticalInformation’<https:///ua/>accessed26?May?,OKaplina,ITitko,‘ADeliberatelyUnjustVerdict,Judgment,RulingorOrderPassedbyaJudge:’(2012)2(138)BulletinoftheSupremeCourtofUkraine42-,VBorysov,VTyutyuhin(eds),:in2Vols(PravoPublishingHouse2015)....97pronouncingoftheact,infact,,,judgment,rulingororder,thataredrawnup,signedandpronouncedbyajudge(judges),establishedbylaw,,accordingtowhichaperson,hisrightsandfreedomsarerecognizedasthehighestvalues,??()isshownbythefactthatinthecourseofcriminalproceedings,aninvestigatingjudge,prosecutor,headofthepretrialinvestigation,investigatorofficersofotherpublicauthoritiesareobligedtostrictlyobeytheConstitutionofUkraine,theCode,internationaltreatiesratifiedbytheVerkhovnaRadaofUkraine(Parliament),(righttoafairtrial)andArticle7(nopunishmentwithoutlaw).,becausecourtsinUkraineapplytheConventionandthecase-lawasasourceoflaw(theLawofUkraine‘OntheEnforcementandApplicationofthePracticeoftheEuropeanCourtofHumanRights’in2006).Forholdingjudgescriminallyliableforacourtdecisionitiscrucialtoprovethattheseactshavesignsof‘unjust’.,anunjust(illegal)decisionisnotonlyunfair,butisalsotakeninviolationofthelaw,,thecircumstancesofpassingadeliberatelyunjustverdict,judgment,,justiceinUkraineiscarriedoutonlybycourts(),andthecourtdecidesinthenameofUkraine(-1).Thus,–criminal,civil,‘OnResponsetoOathViolationsbyJudgesoftheConstitutionalCourtofUkraine’№775-VIIon24February2014bytheVerkhovnaRadaofUkraine(Parliament),eneralofUkraineinitiatingcriminalproceedingsonthedecisionbytheConstitutionalCourtofUkraine№20-rpofESSTOJUSTICEINEASTERNEUROPE,(3)/’address,whichexpressedtheirconcernandpointedtotheprovisionsoftheLawofUkraine‘OntheConstitutionalCourtofUkraine’,withtheexceptionofinsultordefamationwhentryingcases,takingdecisionsandgivingopinionsbytheConstitutionalCourtofUkraine(Article28oftheLawofUkraine‘OntheConstitutionalCourtUkraine’).,thejudgesoftheConstitutionalCourtofUkrainemaybeheldcriminallyliable,inprinciple,butunderaspecialprocedure,asprovidedbytheConstitutionofUkraine(,,,)andtheCriminalProcedureCodeofUkraine(Chapter37).Second,legislativepositionoftheConstitutionalCourtofUkraineinthejudiciaryasabodywithaspecialstatusthatcarriesoutitstaskswithinthejusticesystem,isconsistentwiththecourtsystem().5Therefore,thescopeofconstitutionaljusticeandconstitutionaljusticeparticipantsareprotected,aboveall,bytherulesofSectionXVIIIoftheCriminalCodeofUkraine‘CrimesAgainstJustice’.Third,theprovisionoftheLawofUkraine‘OntheConstitutionalCourtofUkraine’(),whichdischargesjudgesfromlegalliability,haslimitedeffect,,andprovidesanimportantguaranteeoftheruleoflaw().6However,somecriminallawexpertsbelievethattheConstitutionalCourtofUkrainedoesnotadministerjustice(,).However,itisnotclear,,thejudgesoftheConstitutionalCourtofUkrainecannotbebroughttojusticeforpassingadeliberatelyunjustjudgment,becausejudgeswhodonotadministerjusticemitanycrimeagainstjustice,,,judgesoftheConstitutionalCourtofUkraineshouldbeheldcriminallyliableforpassingdeliberatelyunjustdecisions,takenafterconsideringCasesofunconstitutionalityoflawsandregulationsoftheVerkhovnaRada(Parliament),thePresident,of4TheofficialSiteoftheConstitutionalCourtofUkraine</uk/publish/article/239150>accessed27?May?,‘CriminalLawApproachtoUnderstandingtheConceptofJustice’(2015)3(82),‘OntheResponsibilityoftheConstitutionalCourtofUkraine’(2013)26(65),2-1(Part?1)SсholarlynotesofV.?‘Legalscience’,‘SomeIssuesofQualifyingDeliberatelyUnjustDecisionsTakenbyaJudge(Judges)inCriminalProceedingsinTermsofCriminalLaw(Art.)’(2014)8(168),‘TheResponsibilityoftheConstitutionalCourtofUkraineJudgesforPassingaDeliberatelyUnjustAct:theProbleminTermsofDeLegeFerenda’inOnCrimesandPunishment:theEvolutionofcriminalLawDoctrine(MaterialsofInternationalScientific-PracticalConferenceDedicatedto250tharia,YurydychnaLiteratura2014)....99MinistersofUkraine(Government),legalactsoftheCrimeanParliament(,).Weagreethat‘theconstitutionaljurisdictionisimplementedontheprinciplesofconstitutionaljustice,anditsgoalisaimedatachievingtheinviolabilityoftheconstitutionalorder,establishingtheprincipleofseparationofpowersandtheruleoflaw,whichthesocietyaspiresto’().,butadisputeresolution,‘OntheConstitutionalCourtofUkraine’stipulatesthatthepowersoftheConstitutionalCourtofUkrainedonotincludetheissuesoflegalityofactsofstateauthorities,authoritiesoftheAutonomousRepublicofCrimeaandlocalgovernments,andothermatterswithin