Ensuring the unity of judicial practice is the implementation of the legal certainty principle, which is considered as the part of the rule of law, ensures the predictability of court decisions. At the theoretical level, the issues of the unity of judicial practice are mostly the subject of research in the context of judicial reform and the judiciary, but comprehensive research on this issue in the field of modern criminal justice is almost absent. The purpose of the study is to establish a system of legal means to ensure the unity of judicial practice. The methodological basis of the study was based on general and special methods, namely: dialectical, systematic, formal-legal and logical methods. The authors provide a brief overview of the theoretical provisions that determine the socio-legal value of the unity of law enforcement practice. The concept of "unity of judicial practice" in the field of criminal proceedings is analyzed and it was emphasized the usage of the approach of understanding the unity of judicial practice as a synonym of equal (adjustment) application of procedural and material norms in homogeneous categories of court decisions, which are adopted in the course of criminal proceedings. It is established that the limit of permitted differences in the application of the law is quite flexible and informal. It is established that the quality of the law cannot be assessed in isolation from the practice of its application. The authors also emphasize the instrumental role of judicial practice in the general mechanism of ensuring uniformity of law enforcement. A position was expressed on the role of explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court in the general mechanism of ensuring the unity of judicial practice. It is established that the system of legal means to ensure the unity of application of the law in the field of criminal proceedings consists of a set of interrelated elements. The results of the study can be used in further scientific development of the problem of ensuring the unity of judicial practice, scientific substantiation of proposals aimed to improve the current legislation of Ukraine, which regulates the issues that have become the subject of this research

No abstract

One of the means of ensuring the stability and unity of judicial practice is the decision of the Supreme Court, which deviates from the conclusion on the application of the rule of law in such legal relations. The current criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine clearly regulates the procedure for such a derogation, which is generally in line with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and international recommendations in this area. However, this procedure has immanent significant features that require scientific analysis of the current procedural form in this segment with regard to its adequacy to the needs of ensuring the right of everyone to a fair trial and society's expectations for reasonable predictability of court decisions. In view of this, within the framework of this study, the categories “unity” and “sustainability” of judicial practice as a subject of provision by the Supreme Court was carried out. To achieve this purpose, the authors used a set of modern general and special legal methods. The study considers the procedural order for the Supreme Court to deviate from the conclusion on the application of the rule of law in such legal relations; the legal nature of the issue of the hierarchy of legal positions of the Supreme Court is analysed. It is established that the key idea embodied by the legislator in the statutory model of the procedure for deviating from the opinion on the application of the rule of law is that the possibility of such a deviation from the opinion, depending on the composition of the court in which it was adopted and determines the "higher degree of significance" of such a conclusion and its application in further judicial practice. These areas were studied with the consideration of the recommendations of the Advisory Council of European Judges, as well as the relevant practice of the Supreme Court

Н. В. Глинська, доктор юридичних наук, старший науковий співробітник, завідувачка відділом дослідження проблем кримінального процесу та судоустрою Науково-дослідного інституту вивчення проблем злочинності імені академіка В. В. Сташиса НАПрН України ORCID ID: 0000-0001-8552-445Х Д. І. Клепка, кандидат юридичних наук, науковий співробітник відділу дослідження проблем кримінального процесу та судоустрою Науково-дослідного інституту вивчення проблем злочинності імені академіка В.