Modernization experience of judicial policy post soviet countries

  • O. A. Antoniuc Дніпропетровський національний університет імені Олеся Гончара
Keywords: judicial politics, the judiciary, judicial reform, the Supreme Court, the High Council of Justice of the Republic of Georgia, the Supreme Judicial Council of the Republic of Kazakhstan


The article analyzed the experience of implementing the policy of modernization of judicial systems in the states of the former Soviet Union as an example of the Republic of Georgia and the Republic of Kazakhstan. It is reveals some of the institutional and functional features, positive and negative effects of the existing models in these countries the judicial system. Considerable attention is paid to the disclosure threats to independence of judges and ways to overcome them in the course of judicial reforms. The findings indicate that analysis of the accumulated Georgia and Kazakhstan, as well as other post­Soviet states, the experience of modernization policy of national judicial systems is very useful for the improvement of the domestic judicial system in the context of the proclaimed judicial reform. First it must ensure the restoration of the unity of the judiciary in the possibility of the existence of certain specialized vessels. Regarding the latter, it is interesting Kazakhstan practice, when the specialized courts are formed with the status of the regional or district court, without disrupting the unity of the judiciary, which is headed by the Supreme Court. Considerable interest may also be the creation of the courts of public councils to assess the ethical qualities of the candidates for judges, the introduction of the model­speakers of judges, the development of pre­trial (mediation) and alternative (arbitration courts) forms of dispute resolution. The irrevocability of democratic transformations in Ukraine is inextricably linked with the strengthening of the judicial system, which can become a reliable guarantor of the rule of law and justice, and protect the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens. The construction of a democratic rule of law, where the rights of a person and a citizen are securely assured, the rule of law is ensured, and the main democratic institutions are stably functioning, impossible without the creation of a strong and independent judiciary. Understanding and understanding this fundamental postulate and is intended to be the starting point in defining a strategy for judicial reform. Further democratization of the Ukrainian state should take place through the strengthening of the role of the judiciary, the provision of guarantees of independent, impartial, professional justice, which logically puts forward the issue of judicial reform as one of the priority places in the process of law-making and state-building in Ukraine.


1. Konstitutsionnyiy zakon №132 «O sudebnoy sisteme i statuse sudey Respubliki Kazahstan» (Constitutional Law №132 «On the Judicial System and Status of Judges of the Republic of Kazakhstan»). – Mode of accesa:
2. Kontseptsiya pravovoy politiki Respubliki Kazahstan na period s 2010 do 2020 gg. (Concept of Legal Policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan for the period from 2010 to 2020.). – Mode of accesa: http://www.kaz­
3. Epstein L. The Choices Justices Make [Text]/ Lee Epstein, Jack Knight. – Washignton, DC: CQ Press, 1998. – 186 p.
4. Ferejohn J. Independent Judges, Dependent Judiciary: Explaining Judicial Independence [Text] / John Ferejohn // Southern California Law Review. – 1999. – Vol. 72. – P. 353­384.
5. Ferejohn J. Judicializing Politics, Politicizing Law [Text] / John Ferejohn // Law and Contemporary Problems. – 2002. – Vol. 65, № 3. – P. 41­68.
6. Jaskovska E. Justice or Politics? Criminal, Civil and Political Adjudication in the Newly Independent Baltic States [Text] / Eva Jaskovska, John P. Moran // Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics. – 2006. – Vol. 22. – P. 485­506.
7. Knight J. On the Struggle for Judicial Supremacy [Text] / Jack Knight, Lee Epstein // Law and Society Review. – 1996. – Vol. 30, № 1. – P. 87­120.
8. Larkins Ch. Judicial Independence and Democratization. A Theoretical and Conceptual Analysis [Text] / Christopher Larkins // The American Journal of Comparative Law. – 1996. – Vol. 44, № 4. – P. 605­626.
9. Moraski B.J. The Politics of Supreme Court Nominations: A Theory of Institutional Constraints and Choices [Text] / Bryon J. Moraski, Charles R. Shipan // American Journal of Political Science. – 1999. – Vol. 43, № 4. – P. 1069­1095.
10. Nalepa M. Skeletons in the Closet: Transitional Justice in Post­Communist Europe [Text] / Monika Nalepa. – New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010. – 330 p.
11. Ramseyer J.M. The Puzzling (In)dependence of Courts: A Comparative Approach [Text] / J. Mark Ramseyer // Journal of Legal Studies. – 1994. – Vol. 23. – P. 721­747.
12. Rogers J. Judicial Advisory Opinions and Legislative Outcomes in Comparative Perspective [Text] / James Rogers, Georg Vanberg // American Journal of Political Science. – 2002. – Vol. 46, № 2. – P. 379­ 397.
13. Schwartz H. The Struggle for Constitutional Justice in Post­Communist Europe [Text] / Herman Schwartz. – Chicago: University of Chicago Pres, 2000. – 368 p.
14. Transitional Justice in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union: Reckoning with the Communist Past [Text] / Lavinia Stan (ed.). – London: Routledge, 2009. – 328 p.
15. Vanberg G. Abstract Judicial Review, Legislative Bargaining, and Policy Compromise [Text] / Georg Vanberg // Journal of Theoretical Politics. – 1998. – Vol. 30, № 3. – P. 299­326.
How to Cite
Antoniuc, O. (2014). Modernization experience of judicial policy post soviet countries. Grani, 18(1), 141-147.