Abstract:
Розкрито зміст внесених Верховною Радою України змін до Конституції Законами України № 2222-ІV від 08.12.2004, № 1401-VIII від 02.06.2016, № 2680-VIII від 07.02.2019, що послугували правовою основою для трансформації форми правління в Україні, реформування правосуддя в нашій державі й обрання стратегічного курсу України на набуття повноправного членства в
Європейському Союзі та в Організації Північноатлантичного договору, а також надано оцінку соціально-правових наслідків таких змін в Основному Законі Української держави.
Description:
The author has revealed the content of the amendments to the Constitution introduced
by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by the Laws of Ukraine № 2222-IV of 08.12.2004, № 1401-VIII of 02.06.2016, № 2680-VIII of 07.02.2019, which served as the legal basis for the transformation of government in Ukraine, reforming the judiciary in our country and choosing Ukraine’s strategic course for full membership in the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, as well as an assessment of the socio-legal consequences of such changes in the Basic Law of the Ukrainian state. Political and legal events of 2010-2014, related to Viktor Yanukovych’s efforts to usurp state power through the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, confirmed the correctness of the Parliament’s decision to change the form of government, but the balance of powers between the Verkhovna Rada and the President of Ukraine power still remains open.
Assessing the socio-legal consequences of the above amaandments to the Basic Law of our state on justice, it should be based on the fact that the reform of justice is currently incomplete and, therefore, objectively can not have the positive effect expected by the legislator and expected civil society. In particular, against the background of numerous corruption scandals involving judges, as well as legally flawless decisions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, as a result of which some high-ranking officials
avoided criminal liability for declaring knowingly inaccurate information in the declaration or intentional failure to declare information. to the judiciary remains extremely low. Its attitude of ordinary citizens to the monetary remuneration received by judges is quite negative, which not only contrasts sharply with the income of a large part of our compatriots, but also seems unreasonable given the performance of judges. The state of implementation of decisions taken by national courts, which remains unsatisfactory, also undermines the credibility of the judiciary. Given the high risks of making an unreasonable decision through corporate solidarity, the procedure for giving consent to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine to detain or detain or arrest pending a conviction by a court of a judge who has committed a criminal offense is imperfect. It is necessary to note some positive changes. It is primarily a question of introducing in Ukraine the institution of a constitutional complaint, which expands the possibilities of judicial protection of constitutional human rights violated as a result of the application in the final court decision in its case of Ukrainian law contrary to the Constitution of Ukraine.
While positively assessing the steps taken by the current Ukrainian authorities to implement the country’s strategic course towards full membership of Ukraine in the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, it should be noted that such a prospect is rather uncertain. This is confirmed not only by the statements of some European officials, but also by the lack of a roadmap that would identify specific steps that would bring our country closer to EU and NATO membership.
