Судовий прецедент як джерело кримінального права

Abstract

Розглянуто правову природу судового прецеденту, його суть і значення. Визначено місце судового прецеденту в правовій системі України. Досліджено окремі форми судового прецеденту в Україні. Проаналізовано позиції науковців із зазначеного питання. Зауважено також на питанні єдності судової практики та якості судових рішень, які можуть мати прецедентне значення. Запропоновано власне бачення поняття «судовий прецедент». Визначено вимоги до рішення суду, щоб воно мало прецедентне значення. Наведено аргументи на користь можливості незастосування судового прецеденту суддями першої та апеляційної інстанцій. Courts, as the heart of a criminal justice system, have had the same function for thousands of years. The article deals with the judicial precedent in criminal law. The different forms of judicial precedent are analyzed. The role of judicial practice in the process of democratization of society is revealed. The author’s attention is concentrated on the legal sense and the place of judicial practice in the legal system of Ukraine. The law is a compilation of rules and principles which establish rights and duties. The rules and principles concern freedom, conduct and property. The criminal law has many sources. The case law is a large body of principles, rules and concepts. The case law is not based on written law, but many of its basic concepts have been interwoven into the written law through their usage. Because it is created by the courts, the case law is a product of judicial rather than legislative power. It flls in the gaps and helps to unify criminal law, and is, therefore, indispensable to an effective system of justice. Based on generations of experience, it gives continuity and consistency to the law. At the same time, it allows the law to respond to the changing needs of society. When a court decides a case and records its decision in a written opinion, that opinion or case becomes a ‘precedent’. That is, the principles on which the case was decided may be used to decide future cases with similar factual situations. The case law provides a method called ‘synthesis of decisions’, whereby the principle of a case can be applied to different fact patterns. This method involves careful formulation of principles for general application, coupled with the extension of those principles through logic to meet new fact patterns. The impact of a case as a precedent depends mainly on the court in which it is decided. A higher court is not bound to follow the precedents established by the lower courts in its jurisdiction. Lower courts, however, are bound to follow the precedents of the higher courts having jurisdiction over them. Courts of equal rank may use each other’s precedents. Legislators have devised a number of different methods to structure courts decisions.