en

Law Journal of the National Academy of Internal Affairs

  • Received 24.04.2024,
  • Revised 31.07.2024,
  • Accepted 27.08.2024
Download article Download article
Volume 14, No. 3, 2024
  • justice; judicial practice; judicial law; reform; state reform; legal reform
  • https://doi.org/10.56215/naia-chasopis/3.2024.43
  • Pages 43-54

The intensification of legal development, increased interpenetration of legal systems, and transformation of legal and state phenomena in the context of globalisation and integration processes necessitate the investigation of the nature of judicial lawmaking and judicial reform and their correlation. The purpose of this study was to theorise the relationship between judicial lawmaking and judicial reform. This study was based on the historical, formal legal, and comparative methods employed in the context of natural law, positivist, sociological approaches, integrative type of legal understanding, theories of lawmaking and justice. The principal findings of this study lie in substantiation of a series of theoretical provisions on judicial lawmaking and judicial reform. It was found that the legal nature of judicial lawmaking is profound and multifaceted. Judicial lawmaking and judicial reform are closely interrelated. One of the manifestations of this interaction is that the introduction of judicial lawmaking is a task, vector, or result of judicial reform. The study proved that judicial lawmaking is a significant achievement of judicial reform, and not a side effect of the transformation of the judicial system. Judicial lawmaking is an essential factor that substantially affects judicial reform in material, procedural, and organisational aspects. Judicial reform, as an independent type of state transformation, is a crucial area of state- building and is aimed at transforming justice into a fair mechanism for resolving legal conflicts and disputes based on the rule of law. With each stage of judicial reform in Ukraine, the need for official recognition of judicial lawmaking becomes more urgent. The 2016 judicial reform did not positively resolve this issue. As of 2024, the need to introduce judicial lawmaking is mostly recognised at the doctrinal level, but the legislating body denies it, although there are various manifestations of the applied use of the lawmaking potential of courts in the national legal system of Ukraine. The practical value of the findings is that the highest authorities of Ukraine can use them to improve the efficiency of lawmaking, justice, and the transformation of the judicial system

References

[1] Ayoub, L. (2022). Judicial activism in the evolution of a judicial function for the international courts: The role of compétence de la compétence. Netherlands International Law Review, 69(1), 29-55. doi: 10.1007/s40802-022-00212-2.

[2] Bihun, V.S. (Ed.). (2009). Justice as judicial process: Philosophical and theoretical reasoning. Kyiv: Referat.

[3] Bondar, H.L. (2018). Judicial reform in Ukraine (2018): Problems and achievements. Public Administration and Regional Development, 2, 238-259. doi: 10.26693/pard2018.02.238.

[4] Boshytskyi, Yu.L. (Ed.). (2020). Modern state formation: Legal transformation in the conditions of world changes. Kyiv: Talkom.

[5] Bošnjak, M., & Zajac, K. (2023). Judicial activism and judge-made law at the ECtHR. Human Rights Law Review, 23(3), article number ngad015. doi: 10.1093/hrlr/ngad015.

[6] Boyko, I. (2021). The theory and practice of precedent in international adjudication: A view from Ukraine. Access to Justice in Eastern Europe, 4(12), 48-61. doi: 10.33327/AJEE-18-4.4-a000084.

[7] Decisions of the Federal Court of Justice. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.bundesgerichtshof.de/DE/Entscheidungen/entscheidungen_node.html.

[8] Didych, T. (2021). Judicial lawmaking and its regulation in independent Ukraine: Its history and development. Access to Justice in Eastern Europe, 3(11), 82-100. doi: 10.33327/AJEE-18-4.3-a000071.

[9] Drinóczi, T., & Cormacain, R. (2021). Introduction: Illiberal tendencies in lawmaking. The Theory and Practice of Legislation, 9(3), 269-275. doi: 10.1080/20508840.2021.1955483.

[10] Florczak-Wątor, M. (Ed.). (2020). Judicial lawmaking in European constitutional courts. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781003022442.

[11] Grover, S.C. (2020). Judicial activism and the democratic rule of law. Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-35085-7.

[12] Khotynska-Nor, O.Z. (2016). Theory and practice of judicial reform in Ukraine. Kyiv: Legal unity.

[13] Kolodiy, A.M., & Kolodiy, O.A. (2021). Types of lawmaking powers of the Ukrainian people. Journal of the National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine, 28(3), 36-46. doi: 10.37635/jnalsu.28(3).2021.36-46.

[14] Kopytova, O. (2020). Productivity of subsidiary nature of judicial legislation during judicial enforcement. Entrepreneurship, Economy and Law, 8, 317-322. doi: 10.32849/2663-5313/2020.8.52.

[15] Kovalskyi, V. (2021). Important decisions of the Supreme Court in the current year 2021. Retrieved from https://yvu.com.ua/vazhlyvi-rishennya-verhovnogo-sudu-v-potochnomu-2021-rotsi/.

[16] Kravchenko, I.O. (2021). “Court lawmaking” in the administrative court ruling and special features. Private and Public Law, 2, 50-55. doi: 10.32845/2663-5666.2021.2.9.

[17] Kryvytskyi, Y.V. (2023). Legal transformation as a component of modern legal development. Almanac of Law, 14, 248-253. doi: 10.33663/2524-017X-2023-14-248-253.

[18] Latest decision. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.sn.pl/orzecznictwo/SitePages/Najnowsze_ orzeczeniaIOZ.aspx.

[19] Lynnyk, O.A. (2020). Judicial lawmaking as an important guarantee of human rights. Almanac of Law, 11, 339-344.

[20] Makhambetsaliyev, D.B., Sagynbekova, G.M., Abdykadyr, U.B., Alimova, E.A., & Smanova, A.B. (2023). Constitutional lawmaking in the U.S. Supreme Court. Public Integrity. doi: 10.1080/10999922.2023.2282261.

[21] Małolepszy, M., & Głuchowski, M. (2023). Judicial lawmaking in the criminal decisions of the Polish Supreme Court and the German Federal Court of Justice: A comparative view. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 36, 1147-1184. doi: 10.1007/s11196-023-09969-y.

[22] Moskvych, L.M. (2011). Effectiveness of the judicial system: Conceptual analysis. Kharkiv: FINN.

[23] Musella, F., & Rullo, L. (2024). The Italian Constitutional Court under stress. How to respond to political inefficiency. European Politics and Society, 25(3), 484-500. doi: 10.1080/23745118.2023.2244388.

[24] Parkhomenko, N.M. (2023). Paradigm of legal regulation in Ukraine: Content-instrumental dimensions. Kyiv: Parliamentary Publishing House.

[25] Plavych, V.P., & Plavych, S.V. (2013). Modern lawmaking: Problems of theory and methodology. Odesa: Astroprint.

[26] Pylypiv, V., & Semykras, V. (2021). The historical process through the prism of the cultural civilizational approach: The past and the present. East European Historical Bulletin, 20, 207-215. doi: 10.24919/2519- 058X.20.240039.

[27] Rastorhuiev, O., Makushev, P., Pukhtetska, A., Hridochkin, A., & Smaznova, I. (2021). Protection of human rights and freedoms in the administrative proceedings of the European Union. Hasanuddin Law Review, 7(3), 210-225. doi: 10.20956/halrev.v7i3.3215.

[28] Rodiyah, R., Idris, S.H., & Smith, R.B. (2023). Mainstreaming justice in the establishment of laws and regulations process: Comparing case in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Australia. Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies, 8(1), 333- 378. doi: 10.15294/jils.v7i2.60096.

[29] Saparbekova, E.K., Smanova, A.В., Nussipova L.B., Makhambetsaliyev, D.B., & Nessipbaeva, I.S. (2024). Comparative analysis of the concept of constitutional judicial lawmaking in the United States of America and Kazakhstan. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law – Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique. doi: 10.1007/s11196-024-10138-y.

[30] Serdiuk, V.О. (2017). The role of judicial legislation in the process of judicial reform fulfillment in Ukraine. Scientific notes of Taurida National V.I. Vernadsky University. Series: Juridical Sciences, 28(1), 73-78.

[31] Shevchuk, S. (2007). Judicial lawmaking: World experience and prospects in Ukraine. Kyiv: Referat.

[32] Shumylo, М.М. (2021). Quasi-regulatory role of the legal opinions of the Supreme Court on the example of the case of compensation for non-pecuniary damage in the family dispute. NaUKMA Research Papers. Law, 7, 79-86. doi: 10.18523/2617-2607.2021.7.79-86.

[33] Shumylo, М.М. (2022). Model cases as an effective tool for the protection of social rights and ensuring the uniformity of court practice. NaUKMA Research Papers. Law, 9-10, 98-107. doi: 10.18523/2617-2607.2022.9-10.98-107.

[34] Sideri, K. (2007). Law’s practical wisdom: The theory and practice of law making in new governance structures in the European Union. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781351154123.

[35] Stefanchuk, M.M. (2023). Judicial reform in Ukraine: The certainty of a categorical apparatus. Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law, 77(2), 276-282. doi: 10.24144/2307-3322.2023.77.2.47.

[36] Table 1 number of decisions belonging to each variant of lawmaking. (2024). Retrieved from https://link. springer.com/article/10.1007/s11196-023-09969-y/tables/1.

[37] Timchenko, G.P., & Kotvyakovsky, Yu.A. (2022). On the issue of judicial lawmaking in civil proceedings. Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence, 2, 101-105. doi: 10.24144/2788-6018.2022.02.18.

[38] Timothy, E., Kristjánsson H., & Lewis, S. (Eds). (2023). Philosophical foundations of precedent. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/oso/9780192857248.001.0001.

[39] Yasynok, D.M. (2023). Judicial lawmaking as a way to overcome legislative gaps and an exceptional legal problem in the law enforcement process of civil justice of Ukraine. Kyiv Law Journal, 1, 100-106. doi: 10.32782/klj/2023.1.15.

[40] Yasynok, D.M. (2024). Judicial lawmaking and its limits in the civil judiciary of Ukraine. Kyiv: Alerta.

[41] Yusuf, H.O., & van der Merwe, H. (Eds.). (2021). Transitional justice: Theories, mechanisms and debates. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315760568.