Salta al menu principale di navigazione Salta al contenuto principale Salta al piè di pagina del sito
FrancoAngeli Journals

Sustainability Governance: Legal, Economic, and Institutional Mechanisms

N. 2 Thematic Issue (2025): Thematic Issue Sustainability Governance: Legal, Economic, and Institutional Mechanisms, Guest Editors: Karlis Ketners, Vitalii Kotsur

Trial by jury and the fight against corruption: Ukrainian context

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/riss2025oa21085
Inviata
settembre 23, 2025
Pubblicato
2025-12-30

Abstract

The study aimed to conduct a comparative analysis of the organisation and operation of jury trials in Ukraine and the United States, as well as to identify problematic aspects and propose recommendations. In addition, the system of jury selection, the organisation of their activities during the trial and the decision-making procedure were addressed. The study was conducted using the methods of legal document analysis, comparative law, and analysis of judicial practice. The results of the study demonstrated significant differences in the organisation of jury trials in Ukraine and the United States. In Ukraine, there are restrictions on the age of jurors, no clear rules for replacing jurors during trials, and no unified system of jury instruction. In contrast to Ukraine, the United States has a clear system of jury selection and replacement, as well as detailed instructions for jurors, which helps to improve their efficiency. As a result of the analysis, several recommendations were made to improve the jury system in Ukraine, in particular: reviewing the age requirements for jury candidates, introducing clear rules for replacing jurors, creating a unified system of jury instruction and enhancing media coverage of jury trials. Implementation of these recommendations will help to improve the effectiveness of jury trials, strengthen public trust in justice and further democratise the judicial process in Ukraine

Riferimenti bibliografici

  1. Akimbekova, M., Akimbekova, S. and Moroz, S. (2021). Recognition and Enforcement of Decisions of Foreign Courts and Arbitrations in The Republic of Kazakhstan: Current Status and Problems. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 24(SpecialIssue-1), 1-7. Doi: 10.1108/JLERI-12-2021-0076.
  2. Alschuler, A.W. and Deiss, A.G. (1994). A brief history of the criminal jury in the United States. University of Chicago Law Review, 61(3), 867-928.
  3. Alua, M., Rinat, K., Dulatovich, K.M., Sovetovna, S.I., Talgatovna, S.Z. and Beaver, K.M. (2025). The Neuropsychological Consequences of being Arrested and Incarcerated. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 50(4), 686-704. Doi: 10.1007/s12103-025-09808-9.
  4. Amin, M. and Motta, V. (2023). The impact of corruption on SMEs’ access to finance: Evidence using firm-level survey data from developing countries. Journal of Financial Stability, 68, 101175. Doi: 10.1016/j.jfs.2023.101175.
  5. Apakhayev, N., Madiyarova, A.S., Aigarinova, G., Ryskaliyev, D.U., Buribayev, Y.A. and Khamzina, Z.A. (2017). Current trends of legal regulation of relationships in the social protection sphere. Man in India, 97(11), 221-231. Doi: 10.47755/mi.2017.97.11.221.
  6. Bongiorno, F. (2022). Rights. In: P. Cane, L. Ford, & M. McMillan (Eds.), Cambridge Legal History of Australia (pp. 536-555). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Doi: 10.1017/9781108633949.023.
  7. Buribayev, Y. and Khamzina, Z. (2025). Ethical and cultural guidelines in the labyrinth of Kazakhstan’s civil service. International Journal of Public Policy and Administration Research, 12(1), 48-67. Doi: 10.18488/74.v12i1.4155.
  8. Chafetz, J. (2023). The new judicial power grab. Saint Louis University Law Journal, 67(4), 635-654.
  9. Clemente, F. and de Sousa, L. (2024). Democratic values, relative deprivation, political trust, and the resilience of corruption in Portugal: A survey analysis. Crime, Law and Social Change, 82(3), 517-541. Doi: 10.1007/s10611-024-10156-8.
  10. Constitution of the United States (1787). -- Text available at the website https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CDOC-105sdoc11/pdf/CDOC-105sdoc11.pdf.
  11. Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (2012). Chapter 30 “Special procedure of criminal proceedings in the court of first instance”. -- Text available at the website https://rm.coe.int/16802f6016.
  12. Deviatnikovaitė, I. (2024). Comparative administrative law: Perspectives from Central and Eastern Europe. London: Routledge. Doi: 10.4324/9781003458135.
  13. Domashenko, S. (2024). Prospects for the use of artificial intelligence in the legislative process of Ukraine. Democratic Governance, 17(2), 58-66. Doi: 10.56318/dg/2.2024.58.
  14. Draft Law of Ukraine No. 8253 “On Jury Trial in Ukraine” (2011). -- Text available at the website https://ips.ligazakon.net/document/JF6D900A?an=3.
  15. Epps, D. and Ortman, W. (2022). The informed jury. Vanderbilt Law Review, 75(3), 823-890.
  16. Garbaccio, G.L., Lodi, G., Bandeira, and de Melo Bandeira, G.N.C.S. (2023). Compliance in extrajudicial services: An anticorruption strategy. Journal of Law Studies, 28(2), 178-205. Doi: 10.14210/nej.v28n2.p178-205.
  17. Grande, E. (2019). Comparative approaches to criminal procedure: Transplants, translations, and adversarial-model reforms in european criminal process. In: D.K. Brown, J.I. Turner, & B. Weisser (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Criminal Process (pp. 67-88). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190659837.013.4.
  18. Hale, D. (2016). The jury in America: Triumph and decline. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
  19. Holovatyi, M. (2015). The state and society: the conceptual foundations and social interaction in the context of formation and functioning of states. Economic Annals-XXI, 9-10, 4-8.
  20. Horan, J. (2024). Empowering jurors to ask questions about the expert evidence in criminal trials. International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 28(4), 312-328. Doi: 10.1177/13657127241235946.
  21. Jia, M. (2020). Illiberal law in American courts. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 168(6), 1685-1744.
  22. Kaplan, Marino. (2023). Winning a public corruption jury trial against all odds – the craziest case ever. -- Text available at the website https://kaplanmarino.com/publications/winning-a-public-corruption-jury-trial-against-all-odds-the-craziest-case-ever.
  23. Karibayeva, A.K., Nurgaliyeva, Y.N., Saktaganova, I.S., Yessirkepova, M.M., Kydyrov, Z.S., Bizhan, N.R. and Zayed, N.M. (2021). Civil Liability for Corruption Offenses in the Kazakhstan Republic. Journal of Legal Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 24(5), 1-7. Doi: 10.1108/JLERI-11-2021-0046.
  24. Keck, T.M. (2014). Judicial politics in polarized times. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  25. Kenedi, J. (2023). Preventing corruption crimes of money laundering through community participation and POLRI investigators. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, 18(1), 16-28.
  26. Ketners, K. (2025). Adaptation of State Security to Modern Military Operations and Terrorist Risks in the World. Space and Culture India, 13(1), 1-5. Doi: 10.20896/e3p2jm77.
  27. Ketners, K., Jargalsaikhan, Z., Miller, A., Miliienko, O. and Malkhasyan, L. (2025). Evaluation of effective anti-corruption strategies in state institutions. Ceridap, (1), 93-118. Doi: 10.13130/2723-9195/2025-1-48.
  28. Ketners, K., Jarockis, A. and Petersone, M. (2024). State budget system improvement for informed decision-making in Latvia. Scientific Bulletin of Mukachevo State University. Series Economics, 11(3), 86-99. Doi: 10.52566/msu-econ3.2024.86.
  29. Khamzina, Z., Buribayev, Y., Almaganbetov, P., Tazhmagbet, A., Samaldykova, Z. and Apakhayev, N. (2020). Labor disputes in Kazakhstan: Results of legal regulation and future prospects. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 23(1), 1-14. Doi: 10.1108/JLERI-11-2020-0045.
  30. Khamzina, Z., Buribayev, Y., Taitorina, B. and Baisalova, G. (2021). Gender equality in employment: A view from Kazakhstan. Anais Da Academia Brasileira De Ciencias, 93(4), e20190042. Doi: 10.1590/0001-3765202120190042.
  31. King, N.J. (1999). The American criminal jury. Law and Conteporary Problems, 62(2), 41-67. Doi: 10.2307/1192252.
  32. Kolbe, D.C. (2020). The American criminal jury trial – Justice and democracy in action. Law and World, 6(14), 14-20.
  33. Króliczek, P. (2020). Juries and justices of the peace in the United States of America. Criticism of Law: Independent Legal Studies, 12(4), 87-104. Doi: 10.7206/kp.2080-1084.411.
  34. Kutler, S.I. (1968). Judicial power and reconstruction politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  35. Law of Ukraine No. 1402-VIII “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges” (2016). -- Text available at the website https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/en/1402-19#Text.
  36. Law of Ukraine No. 1700-VII “On Prevention of Corruption” (2014). -- Text available at the website https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/en/1700-18#Text.
  37. Law of Ukraine No. 2453-VI “On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges” (2010). -- Text available at the website https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2453-VI#Text.
  38. Letter from the Highest Specialized Court of Ukraine for Consideration of Civil and Criminal Cases No. 223-106/0/4-17 “On Some Issues of Criminal Proceedings in the Court of First Instance by a Jury (2017). -- Text available at the website https://court.gov.ua/userfiles/20_01_2017(1).pdf.
  39. Makhambetsaliyev D.B., Sagynbekova G.M., Abdykadyr U.B., Alimova E.A. and Smanova A.B. (2024). Constitutional Law-Making in the U.S. Supreme Court. Public Integrity, 26(4), 473-484. Doi: 10.1080/10999922.2023.2282261.
  40. Melnyk D.S., Parfylo O.A., Butenko O.V., Tykhonova O.V. and Zarosylo, V.O. (2022). Practice of the member states of the European Union in the field of anti-corruption regulation. Journal of Financial Crime, 29(3), 853-863. Doi: 10.1108/JFC-03-2021-0050.
  41. Mirazbekova K. (2021). Jury Court in Ukraine: Realities and prospects. Journal of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Series Law, 31, 86-91. DOI and global environmental problems: Towards global environmental citizenship. Araucaria, 26(55), 655-674. Doi: 10.12795/araucaria.2024.i55.28.
  42. Mottley K.A., Abrami D. and Brown D.K. (2002). An overview of the American criminal jury. Saint Louis University Public Law Review, 21(1), 99-123.
  43. Muratova A., Zhanibekov A., Aryn A., Shansharbayeva B. and Muratova A. (2024). Effectiveness of Applying Criminal Law Norms on Animal Cruelty in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Pakistan Journal of Criminology, 16(3), 63-80. Doi: 10.62271/pjc.16.3.63.80.
  44. Naurin D. and Stiansen Ø. (2020). The dilemma of dissent: Split judicial decisions and compliance with judgments from the international human rights judiciary. Comparative Political Studies, 53(6), 959-991. Doi: 10.1177/0010414019879944.
  45. Ospanova D., Moroz S. and Niyazova A. (2024a). Legal obligations of a lawyer and standards for the protection of minors in juvenile justice. Social and Legal Studios, 7(4), 231-239. Doi: 10.32518/sals4.2024.231.
  46. Ospanova D., Moroz S. and Niyazova A. (2024b). The problem of defining “juvenile justice” concept and its principles in legal science. Journal of Infrastructure Policy and Development, 8(13), 9250. Doi: 10.24294/jipd9250.
  47. Pollack M.C. (2021). Courts beyond judging. BYU Law Review, 46(3), 719-794.
  48. Popova O. (2024). Introduction of jury trial in Ukraine: Current status and prospects. Litopysets, 19, 231-235.
  49. Robertson C. and Shammas M.E. (2021). The jury trial reinvented. Texas A&M Law Review, 9(1), 109-164. Doi: 10.37419/LR.V9.I1.3.
  50. Roth A. (2022). The lost right to jury trial in “all” criminal prosecutions. Duke Law Journal, 72, 599-673.
  51. Rysin M. and Sukh Ya. (2024). Digital solutions as an effective approach to combat corruption in public procurement. Democratic Governance, 17(2), 18-29. Doi: 10.56318/dg/2.2024.18.
  52. Spytska L. (2023). Assessment of the Political and Security Decisions of the Nuremberg Trials from a Legal Perspective. Pakistan Journal of Criminology, 15(1), 63-76. Doi: 10.47755/pjc.2023.15.1.63.
  53. Spytska L.V. (2022). Analysis of the most unusual court decisions in the world practice in terms of the right to justice. Social and Legal Studios, 5(4), 39-45. Doi 10.32518/sals4.2022.39.
  54. Tsurkan-Saifulina Y.V. and Dudchenko V.V. (2018). Authority of law system formation: Applied analysis of legal system unity. Journal of Legal Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 21(Special Issue 1), 1-11. Doi: 10.1108/JLERI-12-2018-0012.
  55. Tsurkan-Saifulina Y.V. and Popelnytska Y.D. (2023). Discrimination and Rights Violations of Minorities in Ukraine: Evaluating Ethno-National Policies for Reform. Pakistan Journal of Criminology, 15(4), 29-47. Doi: 10.47755/pjc.2023.15.4.29.
  56. Tsurkan-Saifulina Yu. and Stupak M. (2022). Psychological readiness as a component of professional training of future lawyers. Social and Legal Studios, 5(3), 76-82. Doi: 10.32518/2617-4162-2022-5-3-76-82.
  57. Tushnet M. (2020). Taking back the constitution: Activist judges and the next age of American law. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  58. Wilford M.M. and Bornstein B.H. (2021). The disappearing trial: how social scientists can help save the jury from extinction. Psychology, Crime & Law, 29(1), 1-24. Doi: 10.1080/1068316X.2021.1984482.
  59. Zarosylo V.O., Kozachenko O.I., Medvid F.M., Nikonov M.M. and Zarosylo V.V. (2020). Philosophical problems of human being in the legal environment in Ukraine. Astra Salvensis, 8(S1), 123-130.
  60. Zhanibekov A.K., Burkitbekkyzy B.S., Tursunovna A.G., Dulatovich K.M., Alua M. and Beaver K.M. (2024). The utility of Moffitt’s developmental taxonomy in predicting being processed through the criminal justice system. Journal of Crime and Justice. Doi: 10.1080/0735648X.2024.2422505.