Result: ЄВРОПЕЙСЬКІ СТАНДАРТИ ОБҐРУНТУВАННЯ КРИМІНАЛЬНИХ ПРОЦЕСУАЛЬНИХ РІШЕНЬ, ЩО УХВАЛЮЮТЬСЯ ЗА РЕЗУЛЬТАТАМИ ЗДІЙСНЕННЯ СУДОВОГО КОНТРОЛЮ.

The article is dedicated to the studying of European standards for the grounding of criminal procedural decisions, what are the results of the court control process. The demand on grounding of court decisions in practice of European Court of Human Rights is integral standard of the adoption of the legal and fair court decision. The existing regulatory documents of the European Union (also referred to as the EU) do not differentiate "the decision of the trial judge" and "the decision of the court", "grounding of the decision of the trial judge" and «grounding of the decision of the court». The grounding of the court decision in the EU documents is viewed in the aspect of its external independence as a key element of the principle of "access to justice and transparency". Such integral part of the judge status has instrumental significance, as it exists with purpose of creation of optimal conditions when the judge can accept a legal decision and reach the main task of criminal proceedings - the fair resolution of legal conflict. According to the common rule the court decision must be grounded, and its quality first of all depends of the level of its grounding. The grounded decision of the court guarantees that the party has been heard, the provided evidences and the stated arguments were investigated in detail. The properly grounding is the imperative, which cannot be sacrificed for the expediting of the consideration of the case, and the judge should have enough time to prepare his decision. Regulatory legal acts of the EU also do not differentiate such concepts as "grounding" and "motivation" of the court decision, but they prescribe the common concept of "grounding a decision" or "grounds for making a decision". The system of European standards for the grounding of court decisions has been found. Significant attention is given to the grounding of the court (including courts which provide court control during pre-trial investigation) decisions in European countries. The implementation of the demand on grounding of court decision is able to persuade an objective guardian determinant that the criminal reinvestigation of a person is fair. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Analytical & Comparative Jurisprudence is the property of Uzhhorod National University, State Higher Educational Establishment and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)