1212On 16 June 2015 the Constitutional Court of Ukraine has adopted judgment regarding immunity of judges and MPs where the Court indicated that the draft of a law on the immunity of judges and MPs, met by the articles 157 and 158 of the Constitution of Ukraine This decision has big importance of judicial practice and making influence on the functioning of parliamentary-presidential republic Ukraine. In order to enhance argumentation, the judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine have expressed their separate opinions. For example, according to the position of the judge V. Bryntsev, it was ineffective and unconscious usage of constitutional guaranties regarding method of MPs accountability can’t be ground for refusal from the institute of MPs immunity which met international standards. At the same time, the judge S. Vdovichenko in his opinion has indicated that MPs made mistakes in one of the chapters of the chapters of bill that contradict with legislation technique. It was a confusion of terms such as “validity” and “action” which are different categories of the legislative process. The special approach has shown by the judge S. Shevchuk. He is indicated for historical, social and political aspects regarding immunity of judges and MPs. According to his position the above mentioned circumstances can’t beyond attention of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. He stated that Court should follow systematically approach about admissibility amendments to the Main Law of Ukraine the factual of and legally recognized of military aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine. Another problem is the activity of illegal armed groups in the territories uncontrolled of Ukraine. We should also bear in mind the peculiarities of public governance in Ukraine regarding restoration of territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, human rights and freedoms as main features of the legal regime. Argumentation in the activity of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine plays an important role, because the judges in separate opinions were trying to disclosure of arguments for the position of reasoning, rather from formalistic approach.    

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *