CORRUPTION RISKS IN WRONG APPLICATION TO PRACTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE

According to the title the article is concerned with the issue of corruption risks in wrong application to consideration of a trial practice of the European Court of Human Rights. As is known, according to the article 17 of the Law of Ukraine “Implementation of judgments and application to practice of the European Court of Human Rights” from February 23rd,, 2006 courts adopt practice of the European Court as a source of law. Transitional dispositions of this law, which is in force in Ukraine for more than 10 years, contain provisions towards the obligation of the state to take measures for inclusion of issues of mastering the principles of the Convention and the practice of the Court for professional level requirements for certain categories of judges. On the 19th of April during the official opening of the European Council's project “Maintenance for implementation of the European Court's judgments by Ukraine”, the Supreme Court recognized that practice of the European Court would be allowed for formation common jurisdiction, in particular, to minimize appeals of Ukrainian citizens to the European Court. So, prerequisites have not been created thus far, for reducing the number of applications to the European Court of Human Rights against Ukraine, it includes special training for professional judges on the correct application of the Convention's provisions in dealing with cases. Instead, judicial practice certifies that precedent finding can't be applicable in accordance to their content, which indicates to the corruption risks at the judge's discretion. Thus, the article exposes the content of conventional provisions, which were formed in certain legal situations (casuses). Also, there was analyzed its application in Ukraine on the example of Supreme Court's decisions during last years. On the basis of the analysis, the following conclusion was drawn: the wrong application of the legal conclusions of the European Court in some cases results in the misinterpretation of its content, while in others it is a manifestation of corruption.