DEFINITION OF LEGAL PROCESS DISCRETION
Abstract
Introduction. The problem of discretion in the course of law enforcement is not an isolated case of legal validity. Only the legislative body in the country has the right to create by adopting new, amending existing or canceling existing legal norms. But due to the imperfection of the legislation or the existence of a specific construction, the subject of law enforcement is given the opportunity to implement the legal norm based on his own conviction. That does not fully correspond to the principle of legal certainty, i.e. the rule of law must have a specific legal prescription, the implementation of which is carried out in accordance with its essence determined by the legislator. Therefore, the question arises of establishing the essence and features of discretion in the law enforcement process.
Summary of the main research results. In the research, the main parts of the scientific question. The concept of law enforcement was defined, its features as a means of implementing legal norms were emphasized, and the main components of the law enforcement procedure were considered. The issue of cases leading to the emergence of law enforcement discretion is also considered, namely: discretionary powers, evaluative concepts, gaps in the law. An ontology was given to each of them and an analysis of the peculiarities of each legal structure and phenomenon was carried out. Having established the main elements of the scientific question, a comprehensive analysis of their connection with discretion was carried out. The essence and influence of discretion on the process of implementation of the right is defined. The risks of the existence of discretion as an element of legal regulation, the occurrence of which is directly or indirectly allowed by the legislator and provided as a necessary component of law enforcement, are noted.
Conclusions. Having analyzed all the components of the scientific question, conclusions were made regarding the place of discretion in the law enforcement process and ways to overcome the identified scientific problem were proposed. Emphasizing the risks that are caused by the existence of discretion in law enforcement, namely: the application of legal norms not in accordance with the content that is invested in the legal norm by the legislator; realization of one's own interest in the implementation of legal dogma; one-sided law enforcement, there is a need to overcome the relevant negative circumstances. Ways to overcome the specified conditions that allow the enforcer to implement his own will are: determination of the grounds for making a relevant authoritative decision or committing an authoritative act; establishment of meaningful diversity of the evaluative concept that may take place during the implementation of the legal norm, taking into account the multifaceted circumstances that may arise in legal relations; regulate relations that are not directly subject to the law.
Downloads
References
/References
Теорія держави і права / О. В. Зайчука, Н. М. Оніщенко; Київ : Юрінком Інтер, 2006. 688 с.
Гнатюк М. Д. Правозастосування та його місце в процесі реалізації права : автореф. дис. … канд. юрид. наук : 12.00.01. Київ, 2007. 19 с.
Скакун О. Ф. Теорія держави і права. Харків : Консум, 2001. 656 с.
Павлишин О. В. Правозастосування та його ознаки в контексті семіотико-правового аналізу правової реальності. Філософські та методологічні проблеми права. 2017. № 1 (13). С. 161–172.
Теорія держави і права / В. В. Копейчикова; Київ : Юрінком Інтер, 2002. 368 с.
Донченко О. І. Особливості правозастосування як форми реалізації права. Науковий вісник Міжнародного гуманітарного університету : Юриспруденція. 2014. № 11. Том 1. С. 40–42.
Теорія держави і права : навч. посіб. / А. М. Колодій та ін. Київ : Юрінком Інтер, 2002. 368 с.
Нагнибіда В. Теоретичні засади правозастосування. Університетські наукові записки, 2019. Том 18, № 3 (71). С. 33-42
Закурін М. К. Дискреція – дія на власний розсуд. Поняття та прояв. Вісник господарського судочинства. 2009. № 4. С. 17–24.
Шевчук С. В. Судова правотворчість: світовий досвід і перспективи в Україні. Київ : Реферат, 2007. 640 с
Харченко М. В. Розсуд судді під час розгляду справ в адміністративному судочинстві : Дисертація на здобуття наукового ступеня доктора філософії за спеціальністю 081 «Право». Запорізький національний університет. Запоріжжя, 2023. 208 с.
Гаран О. В., Степанова Т. В. До питання дискреційних повноважень адміністративних судів. Наука і техніка сьогодні: Серія «Право». 2023. № 3(17). С. 22–35. DOI: 10.52058/2786-6025- 2023-3(17)-22-35.
Тітко І. А. Оцінні поняття у кримінально-процесуальному праві України : монографія / І. А. Тітко. Харків : Право, 2010. 216 с.
Ус О. В. Кваліфікація злочину, склад якого містить оціночну ознаку. Науковий вісник Херсонського державного університету. Серія «Юридичні науки». 2018. Вип. 2. Т. 2. С. 63–67.
Косович В. М. Оціночні поняття як джерело і форма права. Вісник Львівського університету : серія юридична. 2004. № 40. С. 52–59.
Труба В. Теорія держави і права : підручник. Харків : Одісей, 2007. 448 с.
Рабінович П. Основи загальної теорії права та держави : навч. Посібник. Київ : Атіка, 2001. 368 с.
Скакун О. Ф. Теорія держави і права (Енциклопедичний курс) : підручник. Харків : Еспада, 2006. 776 с.
Вильнянский В. И. Значение логики в применении правовых норм. Ученые записки Харьковского юридического института. 1948. Вып. III. С. 105.
Коструба А. В. Аналогія права та закону як фактична фікція і спосіб «оздоровлення» механізму право припинення. Часопис Київського університету права. 2012. № 3. С. 185–189.
Jom Miller, Lincoln Fly Measuring professionalism in law enforcement. Criminology. 1976. Volume 14, Issue 3. P. 401-412.
Jukka Könönen Immigration detention as a routine police measure : Discretionary powers in preemptive detention of noncitizens in Finland. Criminology. 2022. Volume 56, Issue 3. P. 418-440.
Jacob Livingston Slosser Components of Legal Concepts : Quality of Law, Evaluative Judgement, and Metaphorical Framing of Article 8 ECHR. European Law Journal. 2019. Volume 25, Issue 6. P. 593-607.
Duncan French, Louis J. Kotzé ‘Towards a Global Pact for the Environment’ : International environmental law's factual, technical and (unmentionable) normative gaps. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law. 2019. Volume 28, Issue 1. P. 25-32.
Arran Caza Typology of the Eight Domains of Discretion in Organizations. Journal of Management Studies. 2012. Volume 49, Issue 1. P.144-177.
Zaychuk O. V., Onishchenko N. M. (2006). Theory of State and Law. Kyiv: Yurinkom Inter. 688 p. (In Ukrainian)
Hnatyuk M. D. (2007). Law enforcement and its place in the process of law enforcement: autoref. thesis ... candidate law Sciences: 12.00.01. Kyiv. 19 p. (In Ukrainian)
Skakun O. F. (2001). Theory of the state and law. Kharkiv: Konsum. 656 p. (In Ukrainian)
Pavlyshyn O.V. (2017). Law enforcement and its features in the context of semiotic-legal analysis of legal reality. Philosophical and methodological problems of law. No. 1 (13). P. 161–172. (In Ukrainian)
Kopeichykov V. V. (2002).Theory of State and Law. Kyiv: Yurinkom Inter. 368 p. (In Ukrainian)
Donchenko O. I. (2014). Peculiarities of law enforcement as a form of law enforcement. Scientific Bulletin of the Interna-tional Humanitarian University: Jurisprudence. No. 11. Volume 1. P. 40–42. (In Ukrainian)
Kolodiy A. M. (2002). Theory of State and Law: a textbook. Kyiv: Yurinkom Inter. 368 p. (In Ukrainian)
Nagnybida V. (2019). Theoretical principles of law enforcement. University Scientific Notes. Volume 18, No. 3 (71). P. 33-42. (In Ukrainian)
Zakurin M. K. (2019). Discretion – action at one's own discretion. Concept and manifestation. Herald of economic justice. No. 4. P. 17–24. (In Ukrainian)
Shevchuk S. V. (2007). Judicial law-making: world experience and prospects in Ukraine. Kyiv: Referat. 640 p. (In Ukrainian)
Kharchenko M. V. (2023). Judge's discretion during the consideration of cases in administrative proceedings: dissertation ... candidate of legal sciences: 12.00.07. Zaporizhzhia. 208 p. (In Ukrainian)
Haran O. V., Stepanova T. V. (2023). On the issue of discretionary powers of administrative courts. Science and technology today: Law series. No. 3(17). P. 22–35. DOI: 10.52058/2786-6025-2023-3(17)-22-35. (In Ukrainian)
Titko I. A. (2010). Valuable concepts in the criminal procedural law of Ukraine: monograph. Kharkiv: Pravo. 216 p. (In Ukrainian)
Us O. V. (2018). Qualification of a crime, the composition of which contains an evaluative feature. Scientific Bulletin of Kherson State University. Series Legal Sciences. Issue 2. Vol. 2. P. 63–67. (In Ukrainian)
Kosovych V. M. (2004). Evaluative concepts as a source and form of law. Bulletin of Lviv University: legal series. No. 40. P. 52–59. (In Ukrainian)
Truba V. (2007). Theory of the state and law: a textbook. Kharkiv: Odyssey. 448 p. (In Ukrainian)
Rabinovych P. (2001). Fundamentals of the general theory of law and the state: academic. Manual. Kyiv: Atika. 368 p. (In Ukrainian)
Skakun O. F. (2006). Theory of the state and law (Encyclopedic course): textbook. Kharkiv: Espada. 776 p. (In Ukraini-an)
Vil'nyansky V. I. (1948). The importance of logic in the application of legal norms. Scholarly notes of Kharkiv Law Institute. Issue III. P. 105. (In Russian)
Kostruba A. V. (2012). Analogy of law and law as a factual fiction and a way to "rehabilitate" the mechanism of the right of termination. Journal of the Kyiv University of Law. No. 3. P. 185–189. (In Ukrainian)
Jom Miller, Lincoln Fly (1976). Measuring professionalism in law enforcement. Criminology. Volume 14, Issue 3. P. 401-412.
Jukka Könönen (2022). Immigration detention as a routine police measure: Discretionary powers in preemptive detention of noncitizens in Finland. Criminology. Volume 56, Issue 3. P. 418-440.
Jacob Livingston Slosser (2019). Components of Legal Concepts: Quality of Law, Evaluative Judgment, and Metaphorical Framing of Article 8 ECHR. European Law Journal. Vol. 25, Issue 6. P. 593-607.
Duncan French, Louis J. Kotzé (2019). Towards a Global Pact for the Environment: International environmental law's factual, technical and (unmentionable) normative gaps. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law. Volume 28, Issue 1. P. 25-32.
Arran Caza (2012). Typology of the Eight Domains of Discretion in Organizations. Journal of Management Studies. Vol-ume 49, Issue 1. P.144-177.
Copyright (c) 2025 Stanislav Pevko

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.