The presented article is devoted to the theoretical and legal study of the problem of the integrity of judges through the analysis of the issue of updating methodological approaches to the normative regulation of a certain issue. It is motivated that the principle of integrity is an axiological attribute of public authorities and the judicial system in particular. The need for a mechanism for legal assurance of the integrity of judges is due to a number of ontological circumstances in which our state finds itself: the European direction of reforming legal practice and legislation; reforming the judicial system; overcoming public distrust of public authorities in general and the judiciary in particular.
The inappropriate legal policy that has developed in our state regarding the lack of understanding of the integrity of judges is criticized, since linguistically this concept is derived from the understanding of honesty as a characteristic that should be inherent in members of society when they perform their lawful functions.
This work also proves that the proposed understanding of integrity as a principle of civil service by the norm-maker does not correspond to the modern representation of the elemental composition of the studied concept and to European standards of the formation and functioning of the legal system due to the single-vector understanding of the concept and the absence of a clear methodology for measuring the concept.
It is motivated that in the praxeological sense this category acquires an expanded meaning, in addition to the usual interpretation of honesty, it includes a number of elements: responsibility, objectivity, professionalism, impartiality and good faith.
The author proves that integrity in the measurement of the axiological nature of the intentions of the state mechanism is not just a professional standard, but an ontological requirement for a judge as a subject responsible for maintaining a balance between legal normativity and ethical duty to society. In general, the studied element acts as a conceptual support for the combination of the “letter” and “spirit” of the law, forming a space in which legal reality meets the criteria of justice, freedom and equality of subjects of law.
A substantiated sectoral approach in legislative techniques to the definition of the concept of integrity, where the integrity of individual representatives of public authorities is interpreted depending on the specifics of their powers. The author’s definition of the concept of integrity of judges is presented.
1. Rybak, O. O. (2019). Perevirka na dobrochesnist yak diievyi instrument zapobihannia koruptsii. Dosvid Rumunii ta Moldovy. Aktualni problemy vitchyznianoi yurysprudentsii. Vyp. 1. P. 140–145. [In Ukrainian].
2. Pro zasady derzhavnoi antykoruptsiinoi polityky v Ukraini (Antykoruptsiina stratehiia) na 2014-2017 roky: zakon Ukrainy vid 14.10.2014 No. 1699-VII. Baza danyh “Zakonodavstvo Ukrainy” / VR Ukrainy. 2014. No. 46.P. 20–47. [In Ukrainian].
3. Peretiatko, H. V. (1018). Dobrochesnist yak odyn iz kryteriiv dopusku do suddivskoi diialnosti (za materialamy konkursu na posadu suddi Verkhovnoho Sudu). Sotsiolohiia prava. No. 1–2. P. 50–62. [In Ukrainian].
4. Chechenko, K. O. (2022). Pryntsyp dobrochesnosti derzhavnoi sluzhby: etymolohiia ta heneza moralno-etychnoi normy. Kyivskyi chasopys prava. Vyp. 1. P. 143–151. DOI:10.32782/klj/2022.1.22 [In Ukrainian].
5. Soniewicka, M. (2021). Integralność Sędziego Z Perspektywy Jurysprudencji Cnót. Krytyka Prawa. Niezależne Studia Nad Prawem, Vol. 13, No. 3. P. 81–98. doi:10.7206/kp.2080-1084.473 [In English].
6. Pro derzhavnu sluzhbu (2016). Zakon Ukrainy vid 10.12.2015 No. 889-VIII. Baza danyh “Zakonodavstvo Ukrainy” / VR Ukrainy. No. 4, 43 p. [In Ukrainian].
7. Zharovska, I. M., Rudanetska, O. S. (2024). Derzhavno-reprezentatsiina ta korporatyvno-pravova pryroda dobrochesnosti suddiv: dyskusiia pro yevropeiski standarty. Analitychno-porivnialne pravoznavstvo. No. 6.
P. 862–866. [In Ukrainian].