The quality of judicial decisions in cases of bullying in professional educational institutions

Author:

Yushkevych O. G.ORCID

Abstract

The positions of scholars on the concept of “judicial decision quality” have been examined. Criteria for a high-quality judicial decision include justice, timeliness, justification, clarity, clear language, and an accessible style. The researchers also distinguish between objective (legal training, legal experience, qualification requirements for judicial candidates, opportunities for practicing judges to improve their skills, mechanisms for monitoring the work of judges, unrestricted public access to judicial decisions, the role of legal science in analysing judicial decisions) and subjective (the judge’s personality, salary, social guarantees, working conditions and ability to organise their work) factors that affect the quality of a judicial decision. The summaries of judicial practice and analytical work on the application of the Supreme Court’s legislation focus on the following requirements for the quality of drafting and execution of court decisions in cases on administrative offences: execution of a judicial decision with strict compliance by the court with the requirements established by law to its form and content, compliance with the legislation on the language of legal proceedings. Normative legal acts aimed at developing a unified approach to understanding the quality of judicial decisions have been analysed. Requirements for determining the quality of a judicial decisiont are considered in the Conclusion of the Advisory Council of European Judges No. 11 (2008) on the quality of judicial decisions, including external environment – legislation and economic and social context (legislation, resources, actors in the judicial system and legal education), internal environment - professionalism, procedural rules, case consideration and decision-making (professionalism of the judge, procedural rules and case management, case consideration in court, elements inextricably linked to decision-making). Judicial decisions in cases of bullying in vocational education institutions adopted in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offences are considered with regard to the presence or absence of requirements for the quality of judicial decisions. It has been established that a certain number of judgements do not have the components of judicial quality. Shortcomings of the current legislation on administrative offences have been highlighted. In particular, the outdated provisions of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offences; the absence of an article that would provide for the adoption of rulings by courts in the name of Ukraine in cases of administrative offences, etc. The article analyses the judicial decisions made by courts in the period from 2019 to 2021 in cases on administrative offences involving bullying of participants in the educational process in vocational education institutions in terms of their clarity (comprehensibility) and validity. It has been highlighted that most judicial decisions contain an exhaustive list of evidence in the case; the courts comply with the requirement to find out whether an administrative offence has been committed, whether the person is guilty of committing it, whether he or she is subject to administrative liability, etc..

Publisher

Kharkiv National University of Internal Affairs

Reference15 articles.

1. Basabe-Serrano, S. (2016). The Quality of Judicial Decisions in Supreme Courts: A Conceptual Definition and Index Applied to Eleven Latin American Countries. Justice System Journal, 37(4), 331–347. https://doi.org/10.1080/0098261X.2015.1124033.

2. Bencze, M., & Yein Ng, G. (2019). How to Measure the Quality of Judicial Reasoning? Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies, 60(1), 119–126. https://doi.org/10.1556/2052.2019.60108.

3. Derkach, N. (2013). Access to justice and binding judgments. Slovo of the National School of Judges of Ukraine, 3, 52–57.

4. Hryb, V. V. (2021, November 22). Review of case law on bullying. Pritocol UA. https://protocol.ua/ua/oglyad_sudovo_praktiki_shchodo_bulingu/.

5. Khyzhniak, M. O. (2019, April 26). Requirements for the execution of court decisions [Conference presentation abstract]. All-Ukrainian Distance Scientific Conference “Legal Dimension of Constitutional and Criminal Jurisdiction in Ukraine and Worldwide”, Odesa, Ukraine.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3