乌克兰和波罗的海国家的检察自治模式:比较

O. Khotynska-Nor
{"title":"乌克兰和波罗的海国家的检察自治模式:比较","authors":"O. Khotynska-Nor","doi":"10.33327/ajee-18-7.2-a000201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background:\nNew legislation in Ukraine has introduced a significant change in the function of the prosecutor’s office by establishing bodies of prosecutorial self-governance. Their implementation stems from the change in the constitutional status of the prosecutor's office and the need to strengthen the independence of prosecutors while minimising external political and internal systemic influence on their work. Such reforms align with a pan-European tendency, which was formed as a result of the modernisation of approaches to the perception of the prosecutor's office. The independence of the judiciary and the effectiveness of the administration of justice depends on the independent activity of such body as the prosecutor's office. This necessitates the formation and development of the principle of political neutrality, which should form the basis of the organisation and activity of the prosecutor's office in a state governed by the rule of law.\nOrientation to international standards and best practices allows us to hypothesise about the progressiveness of the Ukrainian model of prosecutorial self-governance. This hypothesis can be tested through a comparative analysis with other countries. We have chosen the Baltic countries for comparison as they are connected with Ukraine by a common Soviet past; however, they decided on the European course of their development much faster.\nThe article offers an overview of models of prosecutorial self-governance in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Ukraine, outlining the structure and competence of their bodies. Based on a comparative analysis of Ukraine’s example, the researchers have identified the main directions for strengthening the institutional capacity of prosecutorial self-governance bodies.\nMethods:\nIn conducting the scientific work, the authors employed several special legal methods, which allowed them to realise both the collection and generalisation of factual data, as well as to carry out a multi-level comparison of selected research objects at the proper level. The study relied on, in particular, formal-legal, logical-legal, historical-legal and comparativelegal methods of scientific learning.\nResults and Conclusions:\nIt has been concluded that the introduction of prosecutorial selfgovernance in the states is a necessary step in the direction of strengthening the independence of prosecutors as a component of effective justice. This makes it possible to minimise external political and internal systemic influence on personnel processes in the prosecutor's office system, contributes to ensuring its political neutrality, as well as solves issues of financial, material, technical, and other provisions for prosecutors. In this sense, the Ukrainian model of prosecutorial self-governance is quite progressive, although it is not without disadvantages. In particular, the dispersion of personnel powers among different subjects makes prosecutors vulnerable in career advancement, specifically regarding clarity in the demarcation of their competence. This focuses on further developing prosecutorial self-governance, strengthening its institutional capacity.","PeriodicalId":502146,"journal":{"name":"Access to Justice in Eastern Europe","volume":"17 26","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"THE MODEL OF PROSECUTORIAL SELF-GOVERNANCE IN UKRAINE AND THE BALTIC COUNTRIES: A COMPARATIVE ASPECT\",\"authors\":\"O. Khotynska-Nor\",\"doi\":\"10.33327/ajee-18-7.2-a000201\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background:\\nNew legislation in Ukraine has introduced a significant change in the function of the prosecutor’s office by establishing bodies of prosecutorial self-governance. Their implementation stems from the change in the constitutional status of the prosecutor's office and the need to strengthen the independence of prosecutors while minimising external political and internal systemic influence on their work. Such reforms align with a pan-European tendency, which was formed as a result of the modernisation of approaches to the perception of the prosecutor's office. The independence of the judiciary and the effectiveness of the administration of justice depends on the independent activity of such body as the prosecutor's office. This necessitates the formation and development of the principle of political neutrality, which should form the basis of the organisation and activity of the prosecutor's office in a state governed by the rule of law.\\nOrientation to international standards and best practices allows us to hypothesise about the progressiveness of the Ukrainian model of prosecutorial self-governance. This hypothesis can be tested through a comparative analysis with other countries. We have chosen the Baltic countries for comparison as they are connected with Ukraine by a common Soviet past; however, they decided on the European course of their development much faster.\\nThe article offers an overview of models of prosecutorial self-governance in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Ukraine, outlining the structure and competence of their bodies. Based on a comparative analysis of Ukraine’s example, the researchers have identified the main directions for strengthening the institutional capacity of prosecutorial self-governance bodies.\\nMethods:\\nIn conducting the scientific work, the authors employed several special legal methods, which allowed them to realise both the collection and generalisation of factual data, as well as to carry out a multi-level comparison of selected research objects at the proper level. The study relied on, in particular, formal-legal, logical-legal, historical-legal and comparativelegal methods of scientific learning.\\nResults and Conclusions:\\nIt has been concluded that the introduction of prosecutorial selfgovernance in the states is a necessary step in the direction of strengthening the independence of prosecutors as a component of effective justice. This makes it possible to minimise external political and internal systemic influence on personnel processes in the prosecutor's office system, contributes to ensuring its political neutrality, as well as solves issues of financial, material, technical, and other provisions for prosecutors. In this sense, the Ukrainian model of prosecutorial self-governance is quite progressive, although it is not without disadvantages. In particular, the dispersion of personnel powers among different subjects makes prosecutors vulnerable in career advancement, specifically regarding clarity in the demarcation of their competence. This focuses on further developing prosecutorial self-governance, strengthening its institutional capacity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":502146,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Access to Justice in Eastern Europe\",\"volume\":\"17 26\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Access to Justice in Eastern Europe\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33327/ajee-18-7.2-a000201\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Access to Justice in Eastern Europe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33327/ajee-18-7.2-a000201","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:乌克兰的新立法对检察官办公室的职能进行了重大调整,设立了检察官自治机构。其实施源于检察官办公室宪法地位的改变,以及加强检察官独立性的需要,同时最大限度地减少外部政治和内部系统对其工作的影响。这种改革符合泛欧趋势,是检察官办公室观念现代化的结果。司法机构的独立性和司法的有效性取决于检察官办公室等机构的独立活动。这就需要形成和发展政治中立原则,该原则应成为法治国家检察官办公室组织和活动的基础。我们可以通过与其他国家的比较分析来验证这一假设。我们选择波罗的海国家作为比较对象,因为这些国家与乌克兰有着共同的苏联历史,但它们在欧洲的发展道路上却走得更快。在对乌克兰实例进行比较分析的基础上,研究人员确定了加强检察自治机构体制能力的主要方向。方法:在开展科研工作时,作者采用了几种特殊的法律方法,这使他们既能实现事实数据的收集和归纳,又能在适当的层面上对选定的研究对象进行多层次的比较。结果与结论:研究得出的结论是,在各州实行检察官自治是加强检察官独立性的必要步骤,是有效司法的组成部分。这可以最大限度地减少外部政治和内部系统对检察官办公室系统人事流程的影响,有助于确保其政治中立性,并解决检察官的财政、物质、技术和其他供应问题。从这个意义上说,乌克兰的检察官自治模式是相当进步的,尽管它并非没有缺点。特别是,由于人事权分散在不同的主体,检察官在职业晋升方面很容易受到影响,尤其是在职权划分的明确性方面。这就需要进一步发展检察官自治,加强其机构能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
THE MODEL OF PROSECUTORIAL SELF-GOVERNANCE IN UKRAINE AND THE BALTIC COUNTRIES: A COMPARATIVE ASPECT
Background: New legislation in Ukraine has introduced a significant change in the function of the prosecutor’s office by establishing bodies of prosecutorial self-governance. Their implementation stems from the change in the constitutional status of the prosecutor's office and the need to strengthen the independence of prosecutors while minimising external political and internal systemic influence on their work. Such reforms align with a pan-European tendency, which was formed as a result of the modernisation of approaches to the perception of the prosecutor's office. The independence of the judiciary and the effectiveness of the administration of justice depends on the independent activity of such body as the prosecutor's office. This necessitates the formation and development of the principle of political neutrality, which should form the basis of the organisation and activity of the prosecutor's office in a state governed by the rule of law. Orientation to international standards and best practices allows us to hypothesise about the progressiveness of the Ukrainian model of prosecutorial self-governance. This hypothesis can be tested through a comparative analysis with other countries. We have chosen the Baltic countries for comparison as they are connected with Ukraine by a common Soviet past; however, they decided on the European course of their development much faster. The article offers an overview of models of prosecutorial self-governance in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Ukraine, outlining the structure and competence of their bodies. Based on a comparative analysis of Ukraine’s example, the researchers have identified the main directions for strengthening the institutional capacity of prosecutorial self-governance bodies. Methods: In conducting the scientific work, the authors employed several special legal methods, which allowed them to realise both the collection and generalisation of factual data, as well as to carry out a multi-level comparison of selected research objects at the proper level. The study relied on, in particular, formal-legal, logical-legal, historical-legal and comparativelegal methods of scientific learning. Results and Conclusions: It has been concluded that the introduction of prosecutorial selfgovernance in the states is a necessary step in the direction of strengthening the independence of prosecutors as a component of effective justice. This makes it possible to minimise external political and internal systemic influence on personnel processes in the prosecutor's office system, contributes to ensuring its political neutrality, as well as solves issues of financial, material, technical, and other provisions for prosecutors. In this sense, the Ukrainian model of prosecutorial self-governance is quite progressive, although it is not without disadvantages. In particular, the dispersion of personnel powers among different subjects makes prosecutors vulnerable in career advancement, specifically regarding clarity in the demarcation of their competence. This focuses on further developing prosecutorial self-governance, strengthening its institutional capacity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
THE FIRST STEPS IN IMPLEMENTING THE UKRAINIAN STRATEGY FOR RESTORING THE RIGHTS OF OWNERS OF CERTAIN CATEGORIES OF REAL ESTATE DAMAGED OR DESTROYED AS A RESULT OF THE ARMED AGGRESSION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION Interplay of Crises: Mapping the Scientific Landscape of Intersecting Themes in the Covid-19 Pandemic and the Russian-Ukraine War ASSESSING THE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS IN THE UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: COMPARATIVE REVIEW NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION (NATO) AND ITS ROLE FOR SECURITY IN THE WESTERN BALKANS COMBATTING SEXUAL VIOLENCE IN KOSOVO: GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES AND LOCAL SOLUTIONS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1