Currently in Ukraine there are obvious systemic problems in the relations between the state authorities and society, and over the recent years such problems have significantly decreased the level of public trust in the state institutions in general and in courts in particular. However, trust of citizens is a special source of power of the state authorities and an indicator of their efficiency at the same time. A government which does not enjoy support of the population and is not trusted by the public is not viable. If such a situation continues in the context of the overall psychological crisis, this can result in an increased social tension in society. That is why the priority goal among the most important tasks currently faced by the judiciary in Ukraine is to gain trust of citizens, increase its authority and social status in society. A scientific study of the issue of public trust in a court of law as one of the criteria of its efficiency will allow outlining the areas in which the judicial system can be optimized, increasing the authority of the judiciary in society in particular and public support for the judicial reform in general, and also will contribute to their understanding and interaction with a view to more efficient implementation of the judicial policy. The purpose of this article is to determine the structural elements of such a systemic phenomenon as trust in a court of law and make their analysis, and also to elucidate the issues which negatively affect the situation with trust in courts and to make proposals regarding possible ways of solving such issues. Actually, the emerged issue of distrust in one of the branches of state power indicates that the state power faces the crisis of unity. The issue of trust in courts is an element of systemic trust in the state power, and therefore should be addressed by systemic measures. At the same time, certain prerequisites for such distrust in the judiciary are entrenched in the statutory regulations and provoked by competitive actions of the branches of government and separate entities vested with state power. The situation can be remedied by law enforcement and law interpretation practices based on the principles of the rule of law and understanding of the legitimate goal of law. Since the judicial power is the state power, the general principles based on which public trust in state institutions is built should also be implemented in the mechanisms of building trust in courts. At the same time, the specific nature of functions and the methods via which the judiciary is established and operates has a determining impact on the tools forming its positive image in the public consciousness by giving them specific characteristics. The meaningful elements having an impact on how the trust in courts is formed by participants of the court process are: a) independence and impartiality of the court in resolving a conflict; b) objective and comprehensive nature of the cognition process and the correctness of its outcome; c) fairness of a court decision in terms of the law of substance; d) fairness of a trial in terms of the law of procedure (for instance, providing the parties with equal opportunities to defend their interests in court; d) legality of actions and decisions of a court.

List of legal documents

Legislation

1. 2016 edition of the report “European judicial systems – European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ)” (Council of Europe) <https://rm.coe.int/european-judicialsystemsefficiency-and-quality-of-justice-cepej-stud/168079048e> accessed 9 March 2018 (in English).

2. Konstytutsiia Ukrainy [The Constitution of Ukraine]: Zakon Ukrainy [the Law of Ukraine] vid 28 chervnia 1996 r. № 254k/96-VR (v redaktsii do 30 veresnia 2016 r.). URL: http://zakon5.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/254%D0%BA/96-%D0%B2%D1%80/ed20140302 (accessed: 08.03.2018) (in Ukrainian).

3. Kontseptsiia udoskonalennia sudivnytstva dlia utverdzhennia spravedlyvoho sudu v Ukraini vidpovidno do yevropeiskykh standartiv [The Concept of Improving the Judicial Process for the Establishment of a Fair Trial in Ukraine According to the European Standards]: skhvalena Ukazom Prezydenta Ukrainy [Approved by Decree of the President of Ukraine] vid 10 travnia 2006 roku № 361/2006. URL: http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/361/2006/print1509542076974082 (accessed: 09.03.2018) (in Ukrainian).

4. Pro sudoustrii i status suddiv [On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges]: Zakon Ukrainy [the Law of Ukraine] vid 2 chervnia 2016 r. № 1402-VIII. URL: http://zakon0.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1402-19 (accessed: 09.03.2018) (in Ukrainian).

5. Pro vnesennia zmin do Konstytutsii Ukrainy (shchodo pravosuddia) [On Amending the Constitution of Ukraine (Concerning Justice)]: Zakon Ukrainy [the Law of Ukraine]

vid 2 chervnia 2016 r. № 1401-VIII. URL: http://zakon0.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1401-19 (accessed: 08.03.2018) (in Ukrainian).

Cases

6. Bezymyannaya v Russia App no 21851/03 (ECtHR, 22 December 2009) (in English).

7. Leo Zand v Austria App no 7360/76 (Commission Decision, 12 October 1978) (in English).

 8. Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu [Judgment of the Supreme Court] vid 14 bereznia 2018 r. № 73195164 u sudovii spravi [in a Court Case] № 800/120/14. URL: http://reyestr.court. gov.ua/review/73195164 (accessed: 06.04.2018) (in Ukrainian).

9. Rishennia Konstytutsiinoho Sudu Ukrainy vid 2 lystopada 2004 r. № 15-rp/2004 za konstytutsiinym podanniam Verkhovnoho Sudu Ukrainy shchodo vidpovidnosti Konstytutsii Ukrainy (konstytutsiinosti) polozhen statti 69 Kryminalnoho kodeksu Ukrainy (u spravi pro pryznachennia sudom bilsh miakoho pokarannia) [Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine Dated November 2, 2004 № 15-rp/2004 in the Case Following the Constitutional Petition of the Supreme Court of Ukraine Concerning the Compliance with the Constitution of Ukraine (Constitutionality) of the Provisions of Article 69 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (in the Case of Sentence Mitigation by Court)] (sprava [Case] № 1-33/2004). URL: http://zakon3.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/ v015p710-04 (accessed: 12.03.2018) (in Ukrainian).

Bibliography

Authored books

10. Lepsius M, ‘Vertrauen zu Institutionen’ Differenz und Integration Die Zukunft moderner Gesellschaften: 28 Kongreß der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie (Campus Verl 1996) (in German).

11. Luhmann N, Vertrauen: ein Mechanismus der Reduktion sozialer Komplexitat (5 Auflage, Lucius und Lucius 2000) (in German).

12. Averin Aleksandr, Istina i sudebnaya dostovernost’ (Postanovka problemy) [Truth and Credibility at Court (Problem Statement)] (2-e izd, Yuridicheskiy tsentr Press 2007) (in Russian).

13. Fridmen Lourens, Vvedenie v amerikanskoe pravo [Introduction to the American Law] (Progress: Univers 1992) (in Russian).

14. Horodovenko V, Problemy stanovlennia nezalezhnoi sudovoi vlady v Ukraini [Issues of Establishment of Independent Judiciary in Ukraine] (Feniks 2007) (in Ukrainian).

15. Khotynska-Nor O, Teoriia i praktyka sudovoi reformy v Ukraini: monohrafiia [Theory and Practice of the Judicial Reform in Ukraine: Monograph] (Pravova yednist, Alerta 2016) (in Ukrainian).

16. Kovalchuk V, Lehitymnist derzhavnoi vlady v pravovii teorii ta derzhavno-pravovii praktytsi: monohrafiia [State Power Legitimacy in Legal Theory and Practice of State Law: Monograph] (Lohos 2011) (in Ukrainian).

17. Moskvych L, Efektyvnist sudovoi systemy: kontseptualnyi analiz: monohrafiia [Efficiency of the Judicial System: Conceptual Analysis: Monograph] (Finn 2011) (in Ukrainian).

18. Ovsiannikova O, Transparentnist sudovoi vlady: monohrafiia [Transparency of the Judiciary: Monograph] (Finn 2010) (in Ukrainian).

19. Prylutskyi S, Vstup do teorii sudovoi vlady (Suspilstvo Pravosuddia Derzhava): monohrafiia [Introduction to the Theory of the Judiciary (Society Justice State): Monograph] (Instytut derzhavy i prava im V M Koretskoho NAN Ukrainy 2012) (in Ukrainian).

20. Rozyn V, Henezys prava [The Genesis of Law] (NOTA BENE 2001) (in Ukrainian).

21. Selivanov A, Konstytutsiia Hromadianyn Sud Profesiini ta suspilni pohliady [Constitution Citizen Court Professional and Public Views] (UAID “Rada” 2009) (in Ukrainian).

Edited and translated books

22. Evropeyskaya konventsiya o pravakh cheloveka i Evropeyskaya sotsial’naya khartiya: pravo i praktika [The European Convention on Human Rights and the European Social Charter: Law and Practice] (Arkhipova L red, Gom’en D ta Kharris D ta Zvaak L per, MNIMP 1998) 219 (in Russian).

 Journal articles

23. Livshits R, ‘O legitimnosti zakona’ [‘About the Legitimacy of the Law’] (1995) 4 Teoriya prava: novye idei 18 (in Russian).

24. Pisareva I, ‘Kontseptsiya al’ternativnogo razresheniya sporov v Rossii’ [‘The Concept of Alternative Dispute Resolution in Russia’] (1998) 9 Khozyaystvo i pravo 28 (in Russian).

Conference papers

25. Hroshevyi Yu, ‘Problemy spetsializatsii protsesualnykh protsedur’ [‘Specialization Issues of Procedures in the Process’] v Komarov V (red), Aktualni problemy zastosuvannia Tsyvilnoho protsesualnoho kodeksu Ukrainy ta Kodeksu administratyvnoho sudochynstva Ukrainy: Mizhnarodna naukovo-praktychna konferentsiia [Actual Issues of Application of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine and the Administrative Procedure Code of Ukraine: International Scientific and Practical Conference] (Natsionalna yurydychna akademiia Ukrainy 2007) 26-8 (in Ukrainian).

26. Zaiets A, ‘Lehitymatsiia prypysiv derzhavy yak kintseva stadiia derzhavotvorennia’ [‘Legitimation of Statutory Regulations as the Final Stage of State Building’] v Opryshko V ta inshi (red), Derzhavno-pravova reforma v Ukraini: Naukovo-praktychna konferentsiia [Reform of State Law in Ukraine: Scientific and Practical Conference] (Instytut zakonodavstva Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy 1997) 54-6 (in Ukrainian). Thesis abstracts

27. Hladii S, ‘Lehitymnist sudovoi vlady’ [‘Legitimacy of the Judiciary’] (avtoref dys kand yuryd nauk, Natsionalnyi yurydychnyi universytet imeni Yaroslava Mudroho 2015) (in Ukrainian).