Review

The questions of enforcement of the right to a fair trial and respectively the appointment of a counsel in criminal procedure are considered in this article, based on analysis of the European court on human rights practice. The aim of this article is to find the basic violations of Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The definition of the right to a fair trial and its implantation are not consolidated as it is contained in different regulatory legal acts. However, the limitation of wide interpretation of principles is not correct approach in democratic society as the European court on human rights considers. The state shall guarantee the professional legal help by advocate and pro bono assistance, if person need it. The legal aid should be provided by the state to create the effective legal defense and to enforce the right to a fair trial. According to the ECHR and to the European legislation, there are two common criteria to apply pro bono legal services: «financial test» and «merit test». The ECHR practice does not contain constant formula applied in typical cases. The ECHR applies the individual approach, deep analysis and objective valuation on the trial for the most effective solution of the case. The right to a fair trial should be considered in relation to one of its elements – the legal effectiveness, under the Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The appointment of counsel in criminal procedure is as a guarantee and protection from violations of human rights by the state. It is not only a legislative provision, however a practical necessity also. According to international regulatory legal acts, Ukraine shall provide an appropriate legal aid during criminal procedures. The legal regulation of this question should be improved in national legislation of Ukraine. However, the amendments are not sufficient method for the enforcement of the right to a fair trial. The practice of the European judicial authorities is liberalized and integrated with new technologies more intensive. The simple procedure of filling an application, the possibility to have a legal assistance via videoconference and other procedures provide a wide range of the opportunities for person to appoint an advocate. The providing of counsel participation in the criminal proceedure is not only the guarantee for person in form of the enforcement of the right to a fair trial. It also minimizes the risk of initiation the procedure in the ECHR, hence it guaranties the recognition of the state on the international scene.

References

1. 1. Commission Recommendation on the right to legal aid for suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings of 27 November 2013 accessed 12.12.2018 (in English).
2. Konventsiya pro zakhyst prav lyudyny ta osnovopolozhnykh svobod: Rada Yevropy; Konventsiya. Mizhnarodnyy document: stanom na 04.11.1950 (zy zminamy ta dopovnennyamy, vnesenymy Protocolom
3. № 14 vid 13/05/2014) data zvernennia 12.12.2018 (in Ukrainian).
4. Hartiya osnovnyh prav Yevropeiskogo Soyza; Yevropeyskiy Soyz; Hartiya, Mezdunarodniy documement: stanom na 07/12/2000 data zvernennia 12.12.2018 (in Ukrainian).
5. Konstytutsiia Ukrainy [Constitution of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy vid 28.06.1996 № 254k/96-VR
6. data zvernennia 12.12.2018 (in Ukrainian).
7. Kryminalnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy [Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine] Zakon Ukrainy vid 13.04.2012 № 4651-VI Baza danykh «Zakonodavstvo Ukrainy» / VR Ukrainy data zvernennia 12.12.2018 (in Ukrainian).
8. Pro vtorinnu pravovu dopomogu: Zakon Ukraini vid 04.11.2018 № 3460-VI Baza danykh
9. «Zakonodavstvo Ukrainy» / VR Ukrainy data zvernennia 09.12.2018 (in Ukrainian).
10. Case of Delocourt v. Belgium (Application No. 2689/65) Judgment of the European Court of Human rights 17.01.1970 accessed 12.12.2018 (in English).
11. Case of Sonyo Tsonev v. Bulgaria (No. 2) (Application No. 2376/03) Judgment of the European Court of Human rights 14.10.2010 accessed 12.12.2018 (in English).
12. Case of Maksimenko v. Ukraine (Application No. 39488/07) Judgment of the European Court of Human rights 20.12.2011 1 Постанова Кабінету Міністрів України від 17.09.2014 № 465 «Порядок оплати послуг та відшкодування витрат адвокатів, які надають безоплатну вторинну правову допомогу» (2014) 77 Офіційний вісник України 2014. № 77, ст. 2189; 2017 р., № 4, ст. 117; 2018 р., № 3, ст. 125.
13. 2 Про виконання рішень та застосування практики Європейського суду з прав людини: Закон України від 23.02.2006 дата звернення 12.12.2018.
14. MAKSIMENKO%20v.%20UKRAINE\%22%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001–108239%22]}> accessed12.12.2018 (in English).
15. Case of Twalib v. Greece (Application No. 42/1997/826/1032) Judgment of the European Court of Human rights 09.06.1998 accessed 12.12.2018 (in English).
16. Case of Quaranta v. Switzerland (Application No. 12744/87) Judgment of the European Court of Human rights 24.05.1991 < https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001–57677%22]}> accessed 12.12.2018 (in English).
17. Case of Zdravko stanev v. Bulgaria (Application No. 32238/04) Judgment of the European Court of Human rights 06.11.2012 accessed 12.12.2018 (in English).
18. Publications Office of the European Union, Handbook on European law relating to access to justice (Luxembourg 2016) accessed 12.12.2018 (in English).
19. Guide on Legal Aid in the Netherlands of 2015 accessed 12.12.2018 (in English).