The purpose of the article is to define the concept, system and content of fair justice standards and outline their relationship to standards of evidence in criminal proceedings. The purpose of the study is to reveal the content of the right to a fair trial, distinguish fair justice standards and establish its relationship with standards of evidence in criminal proceedings. The research methodology consists of comparative law, structural system methods and formal legal methods. The study found that testing standards are covered by justice standards, expanding, specifying, and clarifying their content. The content of the fair justice standards "examination of the case by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law", "adversarial procedure", "equality of the parties", "frankness of the examination of evidence", "presumption of innocence" and reveals the "motivation of judicial decisions". It is concluded that each of these concepts is a heuristic contribution to test standards. As a result of the study, the author's definition of the concept of "fair justice standards" is formulated and the concept is based on its relationship with the standards of evidence in criminal proceedings.

The purpose of the paper is to determine a content of the standard of proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” (SP “BRD”) in the ECHRcase law and Ukrainian criminal proceedings by defining the criteria that characterize it. The subject is the SP “BRD”, doctrine of Ukraine and case-law, including its criticism by the individual judges of the ECHR and Ukrainian scholars. The research methodology includes the methods of analysis, the method of synthesis, the methods of deduction and induction, comparative-legal method, systematic and formal-legal methods. The results of the study. The acceptability of the SP “BRD” in the Ukrainian criminal proceedings is substantiated, in particular, its compliance with the purpose of criminal procedural proof. Practical implication. The criteria which characterize the SP “BRD” in the ECHR’s and SC’s case law are highlighted.

The purpose of the paper is an analysis of the notion of reasonable time, period which is taken into account in their calculation and criteria for determining a reasonable time for criminal proceedings in Ukrainian criminal procedural legislation in the context of the European Court of Human Rights case law. The subject of the study is an analysis of Ukrainian criminal procedural legislation from the point of view of its conformity to the ECHR’s case law in the designation of a reasonable time, period which is taken into account in calculation of a reasonable time and criteria for its determining for criminal proceedings. The research methodology includes comparative legal, systematic, functional, formal legal and others methods. The results of the study. The period which is taken into account in calculation of a reasonable time and the criteria for its determining is studied comprehensively as a basis for definition of the notion of reasonable time. Practical implication. The range of suggestions for improvements of Ukrainian criminal procedural legislation relating content of reasonable time and mechanism used to their calculate is defined. Value / originality. Based on the results of an analysis the authors’ concept of reasonable time is proposed.

The monograph by Maryna Sergіїvna Gorodetskaya vikonan on the topical topic “The subject of investigation in the criminal process”[1] and new scientific achievements for the criminal process science was reviewed; The author cited a complex approach to the interpretation of the criminal procedural subject matter of investigation, cultivating it as a matter of fact (pages 14-196) and structural life (pages 270-344), as well as dealing with the subject matter with the lower categories of criminal procedural -269), as well as the prevention of criminal prosecution (page 348-437).

No abstract