Procedural self-control in the system of administrative proceedings

The article makes a systematic study of the institute of procedural self-control as an important element of law enforcement activity of an administrative court. It is emphasized that court self-control goes beyond the purely ethical or professional dimension and acquires a regulated procedural status which allows the court to identify and promptly eliminate its own errors without recourse to higher courts. The author reveals the content and functional purpose of judicial self-control at certain stages of administrative proceedings. It is emphasized that: judicial self-control does not involve re-consideration of the case on the merits or substitution of the previously established procedure. Its task is not to review, but rather to localize and neutralize errors without affecting the fundamentals of the legal position expressed in the court decision. It has been established that judicial self-control, as a special type of control, possesses all the basic functions characteristic of control activities in general. First of all, these are: the corrective function, which manifests itself in the court’s ability to promptly and independently eliminate its own mistakes, thereby restoring the violated legal balance; the social prevention function, which consists in preventing the recurrence of violations in the future by identifying and eliminating both the mistakes and the causes that led to their occurrence; the law enforcement function, which is expressed in the court’s ability to independently and without delay ensure the protection of the rights, freedoms, and interests of individuals, as well as the rights and interests of legal entities, from violations by subjects of authority. The author focuses on the two-phase nature of self-control: before a court decision is made (through, inter alia, verification of the statement of claim, procedural correction of the proceedings, appointment of expert examinations, interrogation of witnesses, etc.) and after a court decision is made (through mechanisms for correcting typos and arithmetic errors, making additional decisions, explanations, changing the method of execution, etc.). The author analyzes the regulatory framework, in particular, the provisions of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine on procedural self-control (Articles 112, 227, 231, 252, 253, 254, 378, etc.). The author concludes that the institute of judicial self-control in administrative proceedings is not a declarative or purely formal function, but rather a structured instrument for ensuring internal legal consistency, normative integrity and logical consistency of judicial activity. Its application is aimed at continuously maintaining high standards of legal accuracy and procedural integrity in the court’s activities as a guarantor of fair justice.