ResearchBib Share Your Research, Maximize Your Social Impacts
Sign for Notice Everyday Sign up >> Login

INSTITUTE OF IMPEACHMENT: FOREIGN EXPERIENCE OF REGULATION AND WAYS OF IMPROVEMENT IN UKRAINE

Journal: International scientific journal "Internauka." Series: "Juridical Sciences" (Vol.1, No. 27)

Publication Date:

Authors : ; ; ;

Page : 50-57

Keywords : impeachment; President; high treason; other crimes;

Source : Downloadexternal Find it from : Google Scholarexternal

Abstract

The relevance of this topic is due to the existence of such foundations of democracy, as a really organized distribution of power and an effective system of checks and balances, are impossible without a legal procedure for holding senior officials accountable, fully consistent with the constitutional guarantees of their activities. To ensure these democratic foundations, most countries of the world have developed their own mechanisms for removing the President and senior officials from office and bringing them to constitutional responsibility. The paper considers the concept of impeachment, provides a general description of this institution, explores the grounds for the removal of the president and other senior government officials from office by impeachment in foreign countries. The article analyzes the legal regulation of the institution of impeachment in Ukraine, examines in detail the grounds for dismissal from the post in impeachment of the President of Ukraine, notes the need for legislative consolidation of legal consequences in case of termination of the impeachment procedure due to the resignation of the President. Particular attention is paid to the study of the categories of «high treason» and «other crimes» as the grounds for impeachment. The main shortcomings in the legislative regulation of impeachment were investigated and, through the prism of foreign experience, some ways to solve it were proposed. The article draws conclusions in the process of further improving the impeachment procedure. The legislator should single out a more specific list of crimes for which the head of state can be prosecuted, since the uncertainty and abstractness of the concept of «other crimes» complicates this procedure and creates difficulties in determining the basis for prosecution. The article analyzes the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, evaluates individual positions of the Court.

Last modified: 2021-03-25 00:32:23