The article is devoted to the analysis of the methodological foundations of post-legislative monitoring as the main tool for adapting Ukrainian legislation to the acquis of the European Union (EU). The focus is on the need to move from the formal reproduction of EU norms in national law to systematic monitoring of their impact and effectiveness in law enforcement practice. It is determined that the Ukrainian legislative process is still characterised by a lack of a culture of systematic analysis of the consequences of adopting laws, low quality explanatory notes, and a formal nature of regulatory impact assessment and public consultations. These problems contrast with the experience of the EU, where post-legislative monitoring is considered an integral part of the «better regulation» cycle and is implemented through established instruments – the REFIT programme, the SME test, the “one in, one out” principle, and the prevention of gold-plating. The current state of scientific research has been analysed and it has been concluded that Ukrainian doctrine focuses primarily on issues of terminological accuracy, procedural aspects and the need to harmonise the legal system with the EU acquis, while foreign literature emphasises quantitative assessment methods, the evidence base for law-making, and institutional mechanisms for ensuring the effectiveness of legislation. It is noted that terminological accuracy is a prerequisite for effective post-legislative monitoring, and the lack of a unified translation of EU acquis norms creates risks of legal conflicts and inconsistent law enforcement. The importance of avoiding formal, declarative implementation of international standards is emphasised, an example of which is the practice of implementing the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights without properly assessing their actual impact. The article proves that post-legislative monitoring should be considered not only as a technical procedure, but also as a tool for ensuring the rule of law, legislative stability, legal certainty, and public and business confidence in state policy. It substantiates the need to establish a Parliamentary Office for Regulatory Drafting in Ukraine, authorised to conduct comprehensive analysis of draft laws, assess their regulatory impact, verify their compliance with the EU acquis, and coordinate terminological unification. A comparative analysis of institutional models in Germany, Poland, France, Lithuania and the Czech Republic shows that it is specialised analytical bodies that are capable of ensuring the systematic nature and transparency of the legislative process. The results of the study confirm that without the introduction of post-legislative monitoring, Ukraine risks continuing the practice of adopting laws that do not meet European standards of good governance, contradict the principle of tax system stability, and create additional regulatory barriers. It is proposed to consider post-legislative monitoring as an integral component of European integration reforms, combining regulatory impact assessment (ex ante), further analysis of the effect of regulations (ex post), unification of acquis terminology, and institutional guarantees of expert support for law-making activities. The article formulates a comprehensive vision of post-legislative monitoring as a tool for improving the quality of rule-making, minimising legal conflicts and ensuring Ukraine's sustainable approximation to the EU legal system.
Vladyslav Teremetskyi (Thu,) studied this question.