Review

Abstract. The article is devoted to the problems of legal certainty of the requirements for limiting the compatibility of judicial activity. It is emphasized that legally defined restrictions on the types of additional activities of a judge are not a restriction of human rights to freedom of choice, but are one of the tools for ensuring the independence of judges. The purpose of this article is to analyze the legal regulation of restrictions on the compatibility of judicial activity, to determine their legal nature and to formulate proposals for improving modern legislation in the aspect of legal regulation of requirements for the incompatibility of judges as a tool in the mechanism of ensuring their independence. Based on the generalization of the practice of the High Council of Justice in the context of establishing the facts of violation by judges of the restrictions on co-operation, a number of problems have been identified, one of which is the imperfection of the normative wording of the above-mentioned restrictions. The article carries out a systematic analysis of legislative acts that formulate requirements for limiting judicial activity, which made it possible to formulate the composition of the objective side of a judge’s offense in the field of incompatibility requirements. It was concluded that the proceedings to establish the violation of the requirements regarding the incompatibility of the judicial position are currently classified as a special constitutional procedure, but there are no objective grounds for this. These types of offenses may well be included in the system of disciplinary proceedings, which will ensure the unity of the legal procedure for establishing the fact of a judge’s offense resulting in disciplinary liability. It was concluded that the special terminology used in establishing legal restrictions for judges should be clear and clearly interpreted, correspond to European approaches and national realities. The ban on concurrent work should ensure the good faith, impartiality and objectivity of the judge during the consideration of court cases. In turn, the state must provide the judge with everything necessary at a decent level in order to prevent the offense of incompatibility requirements on the part of judges Key words: judge, incompatibility requirements, independence, status of judges, disciplinary responsibility REFERENCES LIST OF LEGAL DOCUMENTS LEGISLATION

1. Pro ochyshchennia vlady [On the purification of the authorities] Zakon Ukrainy vid 16.09.2014 № 1682- VII data zvernennia 07.09.2022 [in Ukrainian].

2.Poperednii vysnovok Venetsianskoi komisii shchodo Zakonu Ukrainy «Pro ochyshchennia vlady» [Preliminary opinion of the Venice Commission on the Law of Ukraine «On Purification of Power»]vid 12– 13.12.2014 [in Ukrainian]. CASES

1. Okrema dumka chlena Vyshchoi rady pravosuddia Boika A M shchodo ukhvaly vid 15.03.2018 № 792/0/15–18 [Separate opinion of the member of the High Council of Justice A M Boyka regarding the resolution dated 03/15/2018 No. 792/0/15–18] data zvernennia 07.09.2022 [in Ukrainian].
2. Okrema dumka chlena Vyshchoi rady pravosuddia Mamontovoi I Yu shchodo ukhvaly vid 15.03.2018 № 792/0/15–18 [Separate opinion of the member of the High Council of Justice, I.Yu. Mamontova, regarding the resolution dated 03.15.2018 No. 792/0/15–18] data zvernennia 07.09.2022 [in Ukrainian].

BIBLIOGRAPHY AUTHORED BOOKS

1. Pohoretskyi M A, Polovyi O L, Yanovska O H, Harantii suddivskoi nezalezhnosti pry prytiahnenni suddiv do yurydychnoi vidpovidalnosti [Guarantees of judicial independence when judges are held legally liable] (K.: VD «Dakor», 2014) 308 [in Ukrainian].

EDITED BOOKS

1. Mizhnarodni standarty nezalezhnosti suddiv [International standards of independence of judge] zbirka dokumentiv (Kyiv, Polihraf-Ekspres, 2008) 44 [in Ukrainian].
2. Zakon Ukrainy «Pro sudoustrii i status suddiv»: naukovo-praktychnyi komentar [The Law of Ukraine «On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges»: a scientific and practical commentary] / Pohoretskyi M A, Kuchynska O P, Khotynska-Nor O Z, Yanovskoi O H (Kyiv, Alerta, 2019) 205–213 [in Ukrainian].

ARTICLES

1. Materynko M O, Porushennia suddeiu vymoh shchodo nesumisnosti yak pidstava dlia zvilnennia z posady: teoretychni i praktychni aspekty [Violation of incompatibility requirements by a judge as a reason for dismissal from office: theoretical and practical aspects] (2018) 2(1) Naukovyi visnyk Khersonskoho derzhavnoho universytetu 155–158 [in Ukrainian].
2. Pohoretskyi M A, Prytiahnennia suddiv do kryminalnoi vidpovidalnosti za st. 375 KK Ukrainy: problemni pytannia materialnoho ta protsesualnoho prava [Bringing judges to criminal liability under Art. 375 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine: problematic issues of substantive and procedural law] (2015) 2 Visnyk kryminalnoho sudochynstva 223–234 [in Ukrainian].

DISSERTATION

1. Moskvych L M, Pravovyi status suddi v Ukraini [The legal status of a judge in Ukraine] (dys. k.yu.n., 2003) 18 [in Ukrainian].
2. Ivaniuk V I, Administratyvna vidpovidalnist suddiv za pravoporushennia, pov’iazani z koruptsiieiu [Administrative responsibility of judges for offenses related to corruption]: (dys.kandydata yuryd.nauk: 12.00.07 Kyiv, 2016) 286 [in Ukrainian].

WEBSITES

1. Karpova N, Postanova YeSPL po spravi «Poliakh ta inshi proty Ukrainy»: rekomendatsii shchodo provedennia liustratsii [Judgment of the ECtHR in the case «Polyah and others v. Ukraine»: recommendations for lustration] data zvernennia 07.09.2022 [in Ukrainian].
2. Konstantyi O V, Instytut nesumisnosti posady suddi zi zdiisnenniam inshoi diialnosti [Institute of incompatibility of the position of a judge with other activities] data zvernennia 07.09.2022 [in Ukrainian].
3. Maliarenko A, Pro vidpovidalnist suddi za porushennia vymoh shchodo nesumisnosti [On the judge’s responsibility for violating requirements regarding incompatibilit] 45 data zvernennia 07.09.2022 [in Ukrainian].