Abstract. In accordance with international legal standards in Ukraine, the independence of judges is guaranteed by the Constitution (part one of Article 126). It is prohibited to influence the judge in any way (part two of Article 126 of the Constitution of Ukraine). Also, the first part of Article 129 of the Basic Law of Ukraine states that a judge, when administering justice, is independent and governed by the rule of law.
The article analyzes the principles of justice as the basis for the functioning of the judicial system. It is noted that in recent years there has been increased scientific interest in the guarantees of the realization of everyone's constitutional right to judicial protection, as well as the theoretical bases and principles (fundamentals) of the administration of justice.
The article considers the concept and characteristics of state coercion in the context of the rule of law, rule of law and legality. The rule of law does not and cannot deny the exercise of coercive influence, but does not recognize coercion that is not based on law. It is noted that in legal science there is no generally accepted approach to the interpretation of state coercion. State coercion is defined differently by researchers. State coercion can be defined as the authorized activity of officials aimed at exercising power in order to comply with and enforce legal acts.
In general, democracy should be understood as a political form of government in the state, exercised by the people or directly (direct democracy), or indirectly through elected representatives (representative democracy). The analysis of foreign literature made it possible to generalize the signs of democracy. However, it is stated that they are purely formal. It is the quality of these institutions that reflects the reality of democracy. A separate analysis of the basic principle of democracy - the rule of law.
The article is devoted to the problem of implementing the rule of law in the system of principles
of criminal proceedings. Based on the analysis of the criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine and
scientific sources, the issues of the universality of the rule of law in the system of principles of criminal
proceedings through the extension of the action of this principle to the institutions of the criminal
process are investigated. It is concluded that in principle of supremacy of law the requirement of
The article is devoted to the analyzis of the court's decision of Constitutional Court ofUkraine and some other constitutional courts decisionswhich refer to legal certainty. As the27result it is defined in which way the content of that principle is revealed in the constitutionaljurisdiction, the link between the legal certainty and the rule of law is clarified. It is stated thatdespite the absence of normative fixing of legal certainty in the Constitution of Ukraine thislegal principle is widely used, its meaning is revealed within the European tradition.
The article on the methodology of system analysis considers the institution of state coercion from the standpoint of the principles of the rule of law, the rule of law and the rule of human rights. The decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in the context of improving the regulatory and legal regulation of the use of state coercion in Ukraine, the role 5 of the court in the process of using state coercion, and the problem of adaptation of the legal base to the requirements of the European Union are analyzed.
The article analyzes the interpretation of the rule of law in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The separate elements of this principle as its integral parts and mandatory prerequisites through which the European Court of Human Rights reveals the content of the rule of law was considered.
Article updated two concepts in their philosophical and legal distinction between “justice” and “justice” that cause at most controversial debates among theorists and practitioners. To this end, the theoretical argument Review eminent scientists, constitutional provisions on justice and justice for the installation of modern approaches to the interpretation of these concepts, their significant semantic differences.
Analyze the elements that have contributed in the period of the feudal Middle Ages lay
not in theory, but in practice the basics of law. They are supported by appropriate regulations.
It is shown that in the period of the absolutist, strictly centralized many countries in Europe,
such a system could not long survive and develop. It is shown that the usurpation of power by
the nobility, not perfect relations center and the regions could lead to more significant results