Hierarchic, temporal, substantive conflicts of laws

The most common conflicts of laws are temporal, hierarchical and substantive conflicts.

Temporal (time) conflict - a conflict arising from publishing at various times in the same issue of at least two of the law. The general principle of conflict of temporal used to overcome these conflicts are the rule, the next law on the same subject cancels the previous action.

Hierarchical (Subordinate) collisions occur when the settlement of some actual relationship claim rules at different levels in a hierarchical (vertical) structure of the law and therefore have different legal force. The general principle of conflict, which is used to overcome the hierarchical conflicts, is: in case of conflict, the rules that have a higher legal force. Overcoming hierarchical conflicts is impossible without clarification of hierarchical (vertical) structure of the legislation of Ukraine. This structure is determined by the legal force of regulations, which, in turn, depends on the place that occupy agencies that issue these acts in the mechanism of the state. Place an act in the hierarchy of legislation also defined specific content of the sources of law, which distinguishes it from other acts adopted the same law-making body. Conflicts between domestic law and the norms of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine ratified international treaties are considered a kind of hierarchical and conflicts should be resolved in favor of international treaties (other than collision norms of international treaties with the norms of the Constitution of Ukraine).

Content (substantive) conflict - a conflict arising if the overlap volume of regulation, due to specific nature of relations. The specifics of these impacts associated with the division of the law in general, special and exceptional. General law is known to be extended to relationships in general; Special operating only within certain kind of relationship and establish it for certain characteristics compared to the general rule; exceptional (which is a special kind of law) set a completely different order than the general rules. In other words, the objective cause of the conflict is usually the specifics of legal regulation of certain relations. In the competition of general and special (exceptional) rules must be guided by the principle exceptional or special law repealing general effect.

 

Acceptable and unacceptable conflicts of laws

In legal doctrine there is classification of conflict of laws on acceptable and unacceptable. Unacceptable conflicts are conflicts that have a harmful, negative impact on legal reality. Unacceptable conflicts give rise to an alternative choice of the most convenient, "favorable" rules in the process of solving the case. Such conflicts are harmful for the proper application of the law and restrict its effectiveness. The existence of such conflicts is the reason for misunderstanding which norm to apply and the situation is no different from the complete unsettled relations. Unacceptable conflicts are mostly conflicts of the time and hierarchical conflicts.

In some cases, conflicts are still needed – acceptable conflicts. For example, substantive conflicts of laws. The risk of incorrect application of norms, sometimes is a necessary for a concise summary of the regulatory material. For example, if the general requirements in all cases contain references to the existence of special, legal norm will increase in volume, that will result in difficulty in application. Similarly, there is no negative impact of conflict, for example, when a new rule enforced in order to eliminate the effect of other regulations of lower legal force, which in principle can not be formally cancelled after the adoption of the new act.

 

Недопустимими колізіями є колізії, що справляють шкідливий, негативний вплив на правову дійсність. Колізії дають підставу для альтернативного вибору найбільш зручної, “сприятливої” норми у процесі вирішення конкретної справи. колізії заважають правильному застосуванню законодавства та звужують його ефективність. В умовах, коли через численність колізій невідомо, яку норму застосовувати, ситуація нічим не відрізняється від повної неврегульованості відносин. Колізіями-дефектами є більшість часових та ієрархічних колізій.

У певних випадках вони все ж таки необхідні. Колізії, що не дефектами (шкідливими колізіями), іноді називають доброякісними (тобто нешкідливими) колізіями: це, наприклад, більшість змістовних колізій. Ризик невірного вибору норми, що підлягає застосуванню, іноді є необхідною платою за лаконічний виклад нормативного матеріалу. Наприклад, якби загальні приписи в усіх випадках містили посилання на існування спеціальних (на зразок “крім випадків, передбачених підпунктом 3 пункту 1 частини третьої статті 25 цього Закону”), нормативно-правові збільшилися в обсязі, їх було б важко застосовувати. Аналогічно, на негативний вплив колізії не можна зважати, наприклад, тоді, коли нова норма вводиться для того, щоб виключити дію інших норм нижчої юридичної сили, які в принципі не можуть бути формально скасовані при прийнятті нового акту.

RULE OF LAW

What opportunities consistent with the rule of law exist and what solutions could be offered by you to prevent, resist and reveal corrupt practices?

1. END IMPUNITY

Effective law enforcement is essential to ensure the corrupt are punished and break the cycle of impunity, or freedom from punishment or loss. Successful enforcement approaches are supported by a strong legal framework, law enforcement branches and an independent and effective court system. Civil society can support the process with initiatives such as Transparency International’s Unmask the Corrupt campaign.

2. REFORM PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE MANAGEMENT

Reforms focussing on improving financial management and strengthening the role of auditing agencies have in many countries achieved greater impact than public sector reforms on curbing corruption. One such reform is the disclosure of budget information, which prevents waste and misappropriation of resources. For example, transparent and participatory budgeting by training local communities to comment on the proposed budgets of their local government.

3. PROMOTE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION

Countries successful at curbing corruption have a long tradition of government openness, freedom of the press, transparency and access to information. Access to information increases the responsiveness of government bodies, while simultaneously having a positive effect on the levels of public participation in a country.

4. EMPOWER CITIZENS

Strengthening citizens demand for anti-corruption and empowering them to hold government accountable is a sustainable approach that helps to build mutual trust between citizens and government. For example, community monitoring initiatives have in some cases contributed to the detection of corruption, reduced leakages of funds, and improved the quantity and quality of public services.

5. STOP LAUNDERING CORRUPTED MONEY ABROAD

Without access to the international financial system, corrupt public officials throughout the world would not be able to launder and hide the proceeds of looted state assets. Major financial centres urgently need to put in place ways to stop their banks and cooperating offshore financial centres from absorbing illicit flows of money.

The European Union recently approved the 4th Anti-Money Laundering Directive, which requires EU member-states to create registers of the beneficial owners of companies established within their borders. However, the directive does not require these registers to be made public.

 

What is the meaning and features of “dysfunction”, “dysfunctional system of justice”?

Meaning

The dictionary meaning of ‘dysfunctional’ is “abnormal or impaired functioning, especially of a system or social group”. Dysfunctional system of justice is a legal system that has turned against itself, within which rule-of-law principles cannot operate, the justice system cannot function and deliver justice as envisaged under international frameworks and standards.

Features

1. The shift from “the rule of law” to a law, that justifies any arbitrary means to keep order by a ruling regime

Under this approach any illegality can be treated as legitimate if the government thinks it needs to be done to maintain order. For example, the extrajudicial killing of those who are considered bad criminals may be considered as a means to be used for achieving order. However, this runs against the rule-of-law approach.

2. Placing the head of the state above the law

by constitutional provisions / having no constitution at all/ treating the constitution itself as an unimportant

3. Limiting the power and the scope of judiciary

excluding the court’s jurisdiction over public law or on matters relating to the constitution.

4. Creating a system of punishment without trial

This may be by way of extrajudicial killings followed by media statements that the person who was killed is a bad criminal. This kind of punishment is accompanied by failure to investigate crimes.

5. Manipulation of powers of arrest and detention for reasons of corruption

Where police powers are heavily manipulated, they are accompanied by the rise of mafia and the underworld, working in conjunction with police agencies.

6. Political control of institutions

Politicization is accompanied by loss of authority in key institutions, like the prosecutor’s office, and the absence of an effective system of command responsibility within the police, since officers increasingly develop relationships with outside patrons that serve their interests independent of their standing in relation to superiors.

7. Mishandling of cases under trial

Vast delays in litigation lead trials in some places to take five or 10 years on average. On the other hand, sometimes cases are administratively speeded up and due process is completely ignored. ‘Judgements’ arrived at in this manner only reflect the version of events given by executive officers, ignoring requirements of procedural justice and often manipulating the process. Some do not give reasons for their orders.

9. Absences of witness protection laws and programmes,

absence of budgets for administration of justice: policing, prosecution and prisons,

absence of effective mechanisms to investigate and prosecute in cases of violations of human rights.

absence of a perception of justice in society. Replaced by cynicism and negative comments about justice.

10. Professional decline

Threats are made to the independence of lawyers, which lower their morale generally, weakening professional associations, as more lawyers begin to adjust to negative systemic changes. Consequently, professional bodies fail in their supervisory responsibilities, further lowering esteem of the profession among the general public and encouraging the withdrawal of talented lawyers.