ESTABLISHING A JUDGE’S GUILT IN COMMITTING A CRIMINAL OFFENSE AS AN EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCE FOR REVIEWING COURT DECISIONS IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS: FEATURES OF EVIDENCE AND CASE LAW

Abstract

The article notes the absence in the criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine of a normative definition of the term “exceptional circumstances” simultaneously with the presence of another group of related grounds (newly discovered circumstances), despite the exhaustive list of grounds for reviewing court decisions that have entered into force, for exceptional circumstances. It is emphasized that the procedure of review of court decisions in exceptional circumstances is not a re-examination of the case on the merits, consideration of the case in appellate or cassation proceedings, therefore, does not involve re-establishing the facts, research and evaluation of new evidence existing at the time of trial, or refutation of available evidence in criminal proceedings. When considering an application for review of a court decision in exceptional circumstances, the court only checks the existence of grounds to which the participants in the trial refer as exceptional circumstances, and assesses whether the circumstances could not have been known to the court at the time of consideration. cases, to influence the legality and validity of the court decision to be reviewed. The legal nature and specific features of evidence to establish the guilt of a judge in committing a criminal offense on the example of existing case law and from the standpoint of research by this issue as an exceptional circumstance for reviewing court decisions are analyzed. The status of judges as public law officials and their affiliation to the subjects of criminal offenses in the spheres of professional activity and justice are outlined. Attention was drawn to the fact that establishing the guilt of a judge for ruling a knowingly unjust court decision as a separate criminal offense did not comply with the principles of legal certainty and unambiguous wording of Article 375 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The current judicial practice and theoretical provisions of domestic scholars on the collection and verification of evidence to confirm the guilt of a judge in committing a criminal offense, which led to an erroneous court decision. It is noted that exceptional circumstances that were not known to the court at the time of the trial must meet the principles of materiality and irrefutability in order to be able to influence the legality of the court’s decision on the merits, with further criminal proceedings in accordance with Chapter 34 of the Criminal Procedure Code Of Ukraine. In general, the establishment of a judge’s guilt in committing a criminal offense, which led to the decision of the contested court decision, must be confirmed by the connection between the illegal actions of the judge and the illegal or unreasonable decision.