Литературное творчество военных лидеров ДНР: опыт психоанализа; Морально-психологический портрет добровольческих вооруженных формирований в ходе Украинской войны (на примере батальона «Донбасс»)
ince 2015, our journal’s publisher, Taylor & Francis, has sponsored the Canadian Association of Slavists’ Taylor & Francis Book Prize. It is awarded annually for the best academic book in Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies published in the previous calendar year by a Canadian author (citizen or permanent resident). The winner of the 2018 prize, to be awarded at the annual conference of the Canadian Association of Slavists at the University of British Columbia in June, is Lynne Viola of the University of Toronto for her book, Stalinist Perpetrators on Trial: Scenes from the Great Terror in Soviet Ukraine (Oxford University Press, 2017). To mark Professor Viola’s achievement and to further the discussion of her important work, Canadian Slavonic Papers/Revue canadienne des slavistes invited three international scholars who work in related fields of Soviet history to comment on the book. Following interventions from Alan Barenberg, Wendy Z. Goldman, and Tanja Penter, Professor Viola offers a response.
The report reveals the main stages of the judicial reform in Ukraine running since 2010. The features, attributing Ukraine to the countries with the transitional justice, are stood out. The specifi c initiatives aimed at improving the mechanism of the administration of justice that have been implemented after winning Euromaidan are analyzed. The increase of the crisis tendencies in the sphere of the judiciary in Ukraine is marked. In addition, a separate study exposed the diffi culties faced by the Ukrainian justice system in connection with the fi ghting in the Donbas. The institutional and psychological problems faced by the judiciary in the frontline are investigated. A general description of the situation in Ukraine as a respondent before the European Court of Human Rights is given.
This article discusses the activity of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine at its present stage of development. The doctrine of judicial self-restraint, which was adopted by the Constitutional Court back in the late 1990s, is critically appraised. The main forms of judicial self-restraint that are used in common law countries – primarily in the United States – are examined and relevant court practices are analyzed. The author comes to the conclusion that there is a certain discrepancy between the democratic standards for the administration of justice in the Ukrainian modification of the doctrine of judicial selfrestraint. In this connection, the inconsistency and internal contradiction of the latter can be criticized. The paper also makes an attempt to analyze the definitions of the refusal to open proceedings in a case passed by the Constitutional Court in 2017. The slowdown in the pace of the work of the Constitutional Court has been associated with the phenomenon of “strategic escape”, which finds its expression in the activity of the constitutional jurisdiction body mainly due to the fact that the Court refuses to accept the most politically significant cases for consideration and delays – sometimes for years – consideration of those cases that are already underway. Particular attention is paid to the personal composition of the Court and the relationship between judges: it is stated that there are several “small groups”, the social interaction between which is not always free of conflict. In general, the conclusion is made about the crisis that Ukrainian constitutional justice finds itself in today.