Modern trends towards enhancement of a particular type of legal protection and legal defense activities are characterized by inconsistency and quite often are marked by “proposals” of diametrically opposed meaning which are expressed by representatives of public authorities. Unfortunately, such trends, along with reaching into separate legislative acts, are also consolidated in the Fundamental Law of Ukraine without a prior broad constructive discussion. Furthermore, authors of such proposals are guided only by their own corporate interests and do not think about the consequences which they will create for citizens of Ukraine and other professionals, they do not compare positive and negative results of implementation of their initiatives in the short and in the long run.

The purpose of the article is to draw the attention of scholars to the fundamental principles of professional activity of attorneys-at-law and to work out a concept of its development, and also to highlight certain problematic issues.

The article touches upon two important and debatable issues which should arouse the interest of experts as regards the content of the science of advocacy (studies of the Bar) and one of its area of research, namely, philosophical perception of the functions of an attorney-at-law in a rule-of-law society, objective and subjective factors which should be taken as the basis for determining the specifics of attorney’s activities, for uniting into the Bar associations, for advanced training etc.

Without a scientific and impartial analysis of current trends in the development of the legal system of Ukraine and, in particular, the Bar as an essential part thereof, it is impossible to develop optimal vectors of its improvement. Therefore, the steps to introduce the “attorney-at-law monopoly” and its abolition are a manifestation of the categorical way of thinking typical of juvenile maximalism. We believe that the attorney-at-law monopoly is possible and useful but, in our opinion, just to a limited extent, in particular, when in the context of investigative actions appointment of a defense counsel and the latter’s participation in criminal proceedings is needed. So, these issues require an advanced scientific research, rather than a rapid decision-making and consolidation thereof in the law, and even more so in the Constitution of Ukraine.

With a view to preventing such categorical steps in the future, an objective picture of the functional focus of attorney’s activities should be created, and it is proposed to give this focus of study the title ‘philosophy of the science of advocacy as one of its branches. Therefore, the article should not be perceived as an outlined theory of the philosophy of the science of advocacy, since its purpose is only the initial stage of establishing the issues which are of the essence for advocacy today and of defining the approaches which can form such a theory that will allow formulating scientifically justified ways to resolve these issues and predicting the development of advocacy in the future.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Bachynin V ta Zhuravskyi V ta Panov M, Filosofiia prava: pidruchnyk dlia studentiv yurydychnykh spetsialnykh vyshchykh navchalnykh zakladiv [Philosophy of Law: Textbook for Law Students of Higher Educational Institutions] (In Yure 2003) (in Ukrainian).

2. Bakaianova N, Osnovy advokatury Ukrainy: funktsionalni ta orhanizatsiini aspekty [Foundations of the Bar of Ukraine: Functional and Organizational Aspects] (Iurydychna literatura 2017) (in Ukrainian).

3. Biriukova A, Advokatura Ukrainy v umovakh hlobalizatsii [The Bar in Ukraine in the Context of Globalization] (Alerta 2018) (in Ukrainian).

4. Kuznietsov V, Filosofiia prava. Istoriia ta suchasnist: navchalnyi posibnyk [Philosophy of Law. History and Modern Times: Study Guide] (PTs Foliant 2003) (in Ukrainian).

5. Lubshev Ju, Advokatura v Rossii: uchebnik [The Bar in Russia: Textbook] (Profobrazovanie 2001) (in Russian). 6. Nersesjanc V, Filosofija prava: kratkiy uchebnyy kurs [Philosophy of Law: Brief Course of Study] (NORMA 2000) (in Russian). 7. Sviatotskyi O ta Medvedchuk V, Advokatura: istoriia i suchasnist [The Bar: History and Modern Times] (In Iure 1997) (in Ukrainian).

8. Sviatotskyi O ta Mykheienko M, Advokatura v Ukraini [The Bar in Ukraine] (In Iure 1997) (in Ukrainian).

9. Vas’kovskij E, Organizacija advokatury, ch 1: Ocherk vseobshhej istorii advokatury; ch 2: Issledovanie principov organizacii advokatury [Organization of the Bar, Part 1: Essay on the General History of the Bar; Part 2: Research on the Principles of Organization of the Bar] (N K Martynov 1893) (in Russian).

Edited books

10. Advokatura krainy: pravove rehuliuvannia ta sudova praktyka [The Bar of the Country: Legal Regulation and Court Practice] (Safulko S ta Sviatotskyi O red, In Iure 2003) (in Ukrainian).

11. Advokatura Ukrainy: navchalnyi posibnyk [The Bar of Ukraine. Study Guide], kn 1 (Fursa S red, KNT 2007) (in Ukrainian).

12. Advokatura Ukrainy: Knyha 1. Orhanizatsiia advokatury (z praktykumom): pidruchnyk [The Bar of Ukraine: Book 1. Organization of the Bar (with a Workshop): Textbook] (Fursa S ta Bakaianova N zah red, 2-he vyd dopovn i pererob, Alerta 2016) (in Ukrainian).

13. Fursa S ta Fursa Ye, ‘Rishennia Yevropeiskoho sudu pro pravakh liudyny: aktualni pytannia yikh vykonannia’ [‘Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights: Topical Issues of Their Implementation’] v Reforma vykonavchoho provadzhennia: sohodennia ta perspektyvy. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats [The Reform of Enforcement Proceedings: the Present and the Prospects. Collected Academic Papers] (Shkliar S ta Fursa S ta Snidevych O red kol, Yuston 2018) (in Ukrainian).

14. Fursa S, ‘Teoriia notarialnoho protsesu (nauka pro notarialnyi protses) ta yii skladovi’ [‘Theory of Notarial Process (Science of Notarial Process) and іts Components’] v Teoriia notarialnoho protsesu: Naukovo-praktychnyi posibnyk [Theory of Notarial Process. Scientific and Practical Guide] (Fursa S zah red, Alerta 2012) (in Ukrainian).

15. Istoriia advokatury Ukrainy [History of the Bar of Ukraine] (Varfolomeieva T ta Sviatotskyi O zah red, 1992) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

16. Fursa S, ‘Konsul’tativnaja rabota advokata po delam o razdele imushhestva suprugov: perspektiva semejnoj mediacii’ [‘Advisory Work of an Attorney-at-Law in Cases of Division of Spouses’ Estate: Prospects of Family Mediation’] (2015) 4 Civilisticheskaja processual’naja mysl’. Mezhdunarodnyj sbornik nauchny statej 419-28 (in Russian).

17. Ryzhenkov A, ‘Gegelevskaja filosofija grazhdanskogo prava’ [‘Hegelian Philosophy of Civil Law’] [2017] 1(10) Rossijskij zhurnal pravovyh issledovanij 204-8 (in Russian).

18. Semjakin M, ‘Filosofija chastnogo prava v metafizike I. Kanta i ee vlijanie na chastnopravovuju doktrinu’ [‘Philosophy of Private Law in I. Kant’s Metaphysics and Its Impact on Private Law Doctrine’] (2013) 3 Rossijskoj juridicheskij zhurnal 112 (in Russian).

19. Tihonravov Ju, ‘Filosofija pravozashhity’ [‘Philosophy of Legal Protection’] (1998) 5 Russkij advokat 3-66 (in Russian).

Dissertations

20. Bakaianova N, ‘Funktsionalni ta orhanizatsiini osnovy advokatury Ukrainy’ [‘Functional and Organizational Foundations of the Ukrainian Bar’] (dys d-ra yuryd nauk, 2017) (in Ukrainian).

Thesis

21. Ivanytskyi S, ‘Teoretychni osnovy orhanizatsii advokatury v Ukraini’ [‘Theoretical Foundations of Organization of the Bar in Ukraine’] (avtref dys d-ra yuryd nauk, 2017) (in Ukrainian).

22. Jashin, ‘Filosofskie idei russkih myslitelej sudebnoj zashhity II poloviny XIX veka (A. F. Koni, V. D. Spasovich, F. N. Plevako, K. K. Arsen’ev, S. A. Andreevskij)’ [‘Philosophical Ideas of Russian Court Protection Thinkers of the Second Half of the XIX Century (A. F. Kony, V. D. Spasovich, F. N. Plevako, K. K. Arsenyev, S. A. Andreevsky)’] (avtoref kand filosof nauk, 2009) (in Russian).

23. Klishina A, ‘Professional’noe pravosoznanie advokatov: teoretiko-pravovoe issledovanie’ [‘Professional Legal Conscience of Attorneys-at-Law: Theoretical and Legal Research’] (avtoref kand jurid nauk, 2008) (in Russian).

24. Vilchyk T, ‘Advokatura yak instytut realizatsii prava na pravovu dopomohu: porivnialno-pravovyi analiz zakonodavstva krain Yevropeiskoho Soiuzu ta Ukrainy’ [‘The Bar as an Institution for Exercise of the Right to Legal Aid: A Comparative Legal Analysis of Legislation of the European Union Countries and Ukraine’] (avtref dys d-ra yuryd nauk, 2016) (in Ukrainian).

Websites

25. ‘Advokaty mozhut otrymaty dostup do YeRDR’ [‘Attorneys-at-Law May Gain Access to the Uniform Register of Pre-Trial Investigations’] (lexinform) <https://lexinform. com.ua/zakonodavstvo/advokaty-mozhut-otrymaty-dostup-do-yerdr> (accessed: 23.10.2019) (in Ukrainian).

26. ‘Bezoplatna pravova dopomoha 2018’ [‘Free-of-Charge Legal Aid in 2018’] (Koordynatsiinyi tsentr z nadannia pravovoi dopomohy) <https://legalaid.gov.ua/images/ docs/2019/zvit_BPD_2018.pdf> (accessed: 23.11.2019) (in Ukrainian).

27. ‘Komisiia z pravovoi reformy pry Prezydentovi poperedno zatverdyla Kontseptsiiu udoskonalennia diiuchoho zakonodavstva pro sudoustrii’ [‘The Commission for Legal Reform under the President Has Pre-Approved the Concept for Improvement of Current Legislation on the Judicial System’] (NAAU, 18.11.2019) <https://unba.org. ua/news/4896-komisiya-z-pravovoi-reformi-pri-prezidentovi-poperedn-o-zatverdilakoncepciyuudoskonalennya-diyuchogo-zakonodavstva-pro-sudoustrij.html> (accessed: 23.10.2019) (in Ukrainian).

28. ‘Konkurs advokativ. Zahalni pytannia’ [‘Competition of Attorneys-at-Law. General Issues’] (Koordynatsiinyi tsentr z nadannia pravovoi dopomohy, 23.02.2015) <https://www. legalaid.gov.ua/ua/konkurs-advokativ/zahalna-informatsiia> (accessed: 23.10.2019) (in Ukrainian).

29. ‘KSU nadav Vysnovok u spravi shchodo skasuvannia advokatskoi monopolii’ [‘The Constitutional Court of Ukraine Gave Its Opinion in the Case of Abolition of the Attorney-at-Law Monopoly’] (Konstytutsiinyi Sud Ukrainy, 31.10.2019) <http://www. ccu.gov.ua/novyna/ksu-nadav-vysnovok-u-spravi-shchodo-skasuvannya-advokatskoyimonopoliyi> (accessed: 23.10.2019) (in Ukrainian).

30. ‘RAU vstanovyla novyi rozmir platy za stazhuvannia’ [‘The Council of the Bar Has Set a New Amount of Internship Fee’] (NAAU, 13.02.17) <https://unba.org.ua/news/2186rau-vstanovila-novij-rozmir-plati-za-stazhuvannya.html> (accessed: 23.11.2019) (in Ukrainian).

31. ‘Zelenskyi otmeniaet advokatskuiu monopolyiu’ [‘Zelenskyi Abolishes the AttorneyatLaw Monopoly’] (LIHA:ZAKON, 29.08.2019) <https://jurliga.ligazakon.net/ news/188844_zelenskiy-otmenyaet-advokatskuyu-monopoliyu> (accessed: 23.10.2019) (in Ukrainian).

32. Mamchenko N, ‘Prezydent Zelenskyi planuie skasuvaty advokatsku monopoliiu: yaki prychyny’ [‘President Zelenskyi Plans to Abolish the Attorney-at-Law Monopoly: What the Reasons Are’] (Sudovo-iurydychna hazeta, 29.01.2019) <https://sud.ua/ru/news/ publication/148923-prezident-zelenskiy-planuye-skasuvati-advokatsku-monopoliyuyakiprichini> (accessed: 23.10.2019) (in Ukrainian).

33. Slutska T, ‘Deiaki pytannia kryminalnoho provadzhennia u formi pryvatnoho obvynuvachennia kriz pryzmu ostannikh zakonodavchykh zmin, shcho nabyraiut chynnosti 11 sichnia 2019 r.’ [‘Some Issues of Criminal Proceedings in the Form of Private Prosecution Through the Prism of the Latest Legislative Changes Coming Into Force on January 11, 2019.’] (Protokol, 10.01.2019) <https://protocol.ua/ua/deyaki_ pitannya_kriminalnogo_provadgennya_u_formi_privatnogo_obvinuvachennya> (accessed: 23.10.2019) (in Ukrainian).