Competition and Dialogue of Judicial Jurisdictions in the Light of the Rule of Law

Abstract

Through the prism of the rule of law doctrine, the article analyzes the reasons for the divergent interpretation of human rights standards in a situation where national mechanisms do not comply with foreign and international practices of human rights protection. It is concluded that this causes a dialogue between judicial jurisdictions, or there is competition between judicial jurisdictions when national mechanisms for the protection of human rights are better, or the use of human rights guarantees threatens the foundations of constitutional democracy and the protection of human rights. Judicial competition and dialogue is an element of globalization and convergence of law, where the concepts of supporters of national legal traditions and ideas of universal values are always in dispute. In terms of the rule of law, this issue rests on legal certainty, reasoning and consistency of legal positions of courts, which is a formal aspect. According to the substantive criterion, the idea of protecting human rights comes to the front. When there is a need to replenish the national treasury by ensuring effective protection of human rights and freedoms, judicial dialogue comes to the front. It accumulates the results of a comparative analysis of the existing experience of human rights protection which may be recognized by the national court as fully adequate and acceptable for the national legal system and will deepen the effectiveness and efficiency of human rights protection in Ukraine. The judicial dialogue is considered in terms of borrowing the experience of international and foreign courts which is acceptable for Ukraine, as well as legislative decision-making taking into account the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the Supreme Court. Key words:constitutional democracy, human rights, judicial competition, judicial dialogue, legal argumentation, legal certainty, rule of law.