The procedure of (self)recusal of a judge as a mechanism for ensuring the court impartiality: ECtHR practice and national legal regulation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31617/3.2026(142)01Keywords:
impartiality of the court, the right to a fair trial; recusal of a judge, self-recusal of a judge, civil proceedings, administrative proceedings, economic proceedings, criminal proceedings.Abstract
The study is devoted to the theoretically and practically relevant issue of ensuring international standards of court impartiality through the procedure of judge (self)recusal through the prism of international standards of the right to a fair trial (paragraph 1, art. 6 of the ECHR). The purpose of the article is to study the procedural aspects of (self)recusal of a judge as a mechanism for ensuring the impartiality of the court in the practice of the ECtHR and to analyse the national legislative regulation of the institute of the judge (self)recusal for compliance with international standards of the fair trial. The article consists of three parts: the first of is devoted to the analysis of the role of the (self)recusal procedure as a guarantee of ensuring the impartiality of the court in the context of paragraph 1 of art. 6 of the ECHR; the second concerns the features of the (self)recusal procedure of a judge in the case of a single-judge proceeding in the practice of the ECtHR and national procedural legislation; the third reveals the features of the (self)recusal procedure of a judge in the case of a collegial proceeding in the practice of the ECtHR and national procedural legislation. The study examines, from both practical and theoretical points of view, controversial issues of regulation and judicial practice in the application of the (self)recusal procedure, and the authorʼs vision of ways to overcome them has been proposed. The feasibility of introducing amendments to procedural legislation has been substantiated, in particular the need to enshrine in civil procedural, economic procedural, and administrative procedural legislation the provision on the need to transfer an application for the (self)recusal of a judge to another judge for consideration in all cases without exception; ensuring the right to appeal a court decision based on the results of consideration of an application for the (self)recusal of a judge; and the need to regulate the institution of (self)recusal in the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses.
References
A. K. v. Liechtenstein (№ 2), (2016, February 18). № 10722/13. http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-160619
A. K. v. Liechtenstein, (2015, July 9). № 38191/12. http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-155824
Croy, S. R. (2019). Step One to Recusal Reform: Find an Alternative to the Rule of Necessity. Wisconsin Law Review, (3), 623-670.
Doynov v. Bulgaria. (2025, April 1). № 27455/22. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-242522
GRECO. (2024). Addendum to the Second Compliance Report of the Fourth Review of Ukraine. https://rm.coe.int/grecorc4-2024-15-final-ukr-add-to-the-2nd-compliance-report-ukraine-pu/1680b46473
Meznaric v. Croatia. (2005, July 15). № 71615/01. http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-69726
Micallef v. Malta [GC]. (2009, October 15). № 17056/06. http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-95031
Mikhail Mironov v. Russia. (2020, October 6). № 58138/09. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-204834
The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct. (2018). Vienna. https://www.unodc.org/documents/ji/training/bangaloreprinciples.pdf
Huiwan, P. D. (2019). Independence and impartiality of the judiciary as a determining indicator of fair justice. Law and Society, (4), 71-77. https://doi.org/10.32842/2078-3736-2019-4-10
Ovsiannikova, O. O. (2020). Impartiality of the court as an element of judicial fairness. Juris Europensis Scientia, (2), 90-96. https://doi.org/10.32837/chern.v0i2.81
Pohoretskyi, M. A., & Starenkyi, O. S. (2025). Impartiality of the Court in criminal proceedings through the prism of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod National University. Law Series, Part 3, (88), 320-328. https://doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2025.88.3.48
Decision of the Council of Judges of Ukraine. (2017, June 8). № 34. https://rsu.gov.ua/uploads/article/risenna-rsu-no-34-vid-08062017-p-f684ff16c0.pdf
Sakara, N. Yu. (2010). The problem of access to justice in civil cases. Law, 256 p.
Sakara, N. Yu. (2011). The right to a fair trial and national practice of civil proceedings. Law of Ukraine, (10, 63-76).
Tsuvina, T. A. (2019). Independence and impartiality of the court as components of the rule of law in civil proceedings. Theory and practice of jurisprudence, 2(16). https://doi.org/10.21564/2225-6555; https://doi.org/10.21564/2225-6555.2019.16.186025
Tsuvina, T. A. (2020). Impartiality of the court in the context of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. Law of Ukraine, (10), 304-312.
Tsuvina, T. A. (2020). Repeated participation of a judge in the consideration of a case between parties: some remarks on the functional impartiality of the court in the context of the rule of law. Comparative-Analytical Law, (1), 218-222. https://doi.org/10.32782/2524-0390/2020.1.52
Tsuvina, T. A. (2021, October 25). Judicial impartiality: international standards and national context. Proceedings of the round table dedicated to the 18th anniversary of European Civil Justice Day (Kharkiv). Oberih, 57-61.
Tsuvina, T. A. (2022). The principle of the Rule of Law in Civil proceedings: a theoretical and applied study. Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University. Kharkiv, 600
Tsuvina, T. A. (2023). Impartiality of the court in civil proceedings: Practice of the European Court of Human Rights and selected cases of the Supreme Court. Problems of Legality, (160), 45-65. https://doi.org/10.21564/2414-990X.160.273808
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
