Review

The scientific ensure of judicial activity is becoming more increasingly urgency due to ming more increasingly urgency due to conditions of continuing instability of social development, natural disaster of legislative regulation of public relations and ambiguous law enforcement. Researching of different aspects this type of organizational ensure of judicial activity will give an opportunity to effectively use scientific resource and achievements of science to achieve the goals of functioning of the judicial system of the state – ensuring everyone’s right to a fair trial.

However, effective realization of scientific ensure of judicial activity as autonomous spear which is determined by holistic system character, is possible to adhere to certain principles, which influence not only the content of the activity, but also determine the scope of such activities.

The goal of article is researching the principles of scientific ensure of judicial activity.

As a result of the analysis, the principles of the scientific support of the Court as certain «meta-principles» were concluded, that is, indicating the relatively autonomous system of principles. The latter are specifying approaches to the process of scientific support of judicial activity taking into account specific and different aspects (scientific, organizational, informational) of its entity.

The system principles of scientific ensure of court activity comprise:

The principle of research. Means that in the process of scientific ensure of judicial activity the primacy of objective scientific knowledge, which is achieved due to the system of principles and methods of scientific knowledge, on certain conjunctive interests (scientific truth should be above all).

The principle of ethics. Means that compliance with the subjects of scientific ensure of judicial activity in the process of its work norms, rules and requirements of scientific ethics.

The principle of proper organization. Means that compliance in the process of scientific ensure of judicial activity of such claims as: legality; non-interference, resource efficiency, transparency. The principle of informativeness. Means that a system of standards and requirements for information, which is processed and produced in the process of scientific support of the judiciary, as well as the treatment of such provisions. Its elements are such imperatives as objectivity, authenticity, completeness, value, relevance (efficiency), availability, comprehensibility of information.

Key word: court, judicial activity, scientific ensure, principal of scientific ensure.

1. Etychnyi kodeks uchenoho Ukrainy: Postanova zahalnykh zboriv Natsionalnoi akademii nauk Ukrainy [The ethical Code of Ukraine: the resolution of the general meeting of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine] vid 15 kvitnia 2009 roku № 2 <https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/rada/show/v0002550–09/ conv?lang=ru> data zvernennia 01.02.2020 [in Ukrainian].

1. Bakhtyna Y, Lobut A, Martiushov L, Metodolohyia i metody nauchnoho poznanyia: uchebnoe posobye [Methodologya and methody of scientific Knowledge: textbook] (Ekaterynburh, 2016) 41–43 [in Russia].
2. Khotynska-Nor, Teoriia i praktyka sudovoi reformy v Ukraini: monohrafiia [theory and practice of judicial reform in Ukraine: monograph] (Kyiv, Alerta 2016) 84 [in Ukrainian].
3. Pravovi osnovy sudovoho administruvannia ta sudovoi diialnosti: navch. posib [Legal bases of judicial administration and judicial activity: textbook] (Kharkiv, Pravo 2019) 47–49 [in Ukrainian].

1. Feier O, Drozd M, ’Teoretychni osnovy resursnoho zabezpechennia diialnosti pidpryiemstva [Theoretical foundations of resource support of enterprise] (2016) 6 Ekonomika i suspilstvo 220–224 [in Ukrainian].
2. Havrylovych L, ’Etos nauki v soctuologii R. Mertona: sudba i status v naukovedenii’[The ethos of science in the sociology of R. Merton: fate and status in science of science] (2010) 1 (4) Sotsyolohyia nauky y tekhnolohyy 124–139 [in Russia].
3. Honcharenko S, ’Etyka nauky ta etychnyi kodeks uchenoho [Science Ethics ’ and the ’ ethical code of the scientist] (2011) 3 Shliakh osvity 2–8 [in Ukrainian].
4. Kampo V, ’Naukove zabezpechennya yurysdyktciinoi diyalnosti Konstytutciinogo Sudu Ukrainy [Scientific provision of jurisdictional activity of Constitutional Court of Ukraine] (2011) 17 Viche 25–29 [in Ukrainian].
5. Mamutov V, ’ Problemy naukovo-pravovoi ekspertyzy u konteksti staloi sudovoi praktyky sudiv zahalnoi yurysdyktsii ta Konstytutsiinoho Sudu Ukrainy’[Problems of scientific and legal expertise in the context of sustainable of court practice of Courts of general jurisdiction and Constitutional Court of Ukraine] (2013) 2 Visnyk Konstytutsiinogo Sudu Ukrainy] 85–95 [in Ukrainian].
6. Otych O, ’«Try kyty» nauky: naukove piznannia – naukove doslidzhennia – naukove znannia’[«Three Whales» of Science: Scientific Cognition – scientific research – scientific knowledge] (2016) 2 Pisliadyplomna osvita v Ukraini 3–9 [in Ukrainian].

1. Ratsa V, Orhanizatsiino-pravovi zasady informatsiinoho zabezpechennia roboty sudu [Organizational and legal basis for information support of the court] (dys kand yuryd nauk Kharkiv, 2017) 30–31 [in Ukrainian].
2. Voloshyna V, ’Naukovo-konsultatyvne zabezpechennya dialnosti Verkhovnogo Sudu Ukrainy’[Scientific and consultative support of the Supreme Court of Ukraine] (dys kand yuryd nauk Kyiv, 2016) 68 [in Ukrainian].

1. Principles for Judicial Administration. The National Center for State Courts, July 2012 < https://www.ncsc.org/~/media/Files/PDF/Information%20and%20Resour ces/Budget%20Resource%20Center/Judicial%20Administration%20Report%209–20–12.ashx> accessed 01.02.2020 [in English].