The changes in the Ukraine’s state language policy in the sphere of education were subjected to Hungarian, Romanian and PASEcriticism since 2017 (wherein the critics claimed that Ukraine, by adopting and implementing the appropriate legislation tapered thelinguistic rights of national minorities in the part of their right to education by using the mother tongue). Therefore, the Venice Commission,and then, the Ukraine’s Constitutional Court have delivered its conclusions and decisions if the new Law on Education of 2017violates the linguistic rights of the minorities, ensured by the Ukraine’s Constitution. Hence, the paper focuses on highlighting the positionof the parties of the constitutional proceedings concerning the constitutionality of Ukraine’s Law “On Education” of 2017.The authors have also analyzed the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, upon which the abovementioned lawwas recognized as constitutional. While adjudicating the case, the Constitutional Court adopted the position of the Ministry of Educationand Science of Ukraine, upon which the state has a right to implement various approaches to national minorities and the indigenouspeople concerning the legal regulation of the right to education conducted by the mother tongue; at the same time, the obligation of thenational minorities to learn and dispose the state language should not be treated as a kind of discrimination or a violation of their rightto education by using the mother tongue.
The article deals with the democratic state-legal regime in the light of the twenty-first century threats. It is noted that the presence of formal features of a democratic regime does not always ensure the functioning of such mechanisms and institutions of democracy as the division of power, freedom of speech and assembly, fair elections and others.
The main internal and external destructive elements influencing both settled and developing liberal-democratic regimes are determined. Emphasis is placed on the destructive activities of the Russian Federation in destroying and discrediting the basic institutions of liberal democracies and popularizing the China model of an undemocratic state-legal regime. The influence of scientific and technological progress, political, social, economic, environmental and military factors on the transformation of liberal-democratic regimes and the world global order is revealed. The danger (for the whole liberal-democratic world in general and Ukraine in particular) of the use of such a phenomenon as "hybrid war" by the Russian Federation in the context of the spread of the fascist concept of "Russian world" is pointed out.
It is proved that there is the need to preserve a liberal-democratic state-legal regime, as the most successful of all regimes offered to humanity, for future generations.
Special features of theSoviet procedural law provided for the mandatory participation of the attorney, hired by the defendant himself or provided by the government, in addition to the participation of public prosecution (prosecutor) in the process. Nevertheless, defendants maintained "the right" of abandoning attorney services. Abandoning attorney services was often a tactical move -the defendant kind of pleaded guilty, demonstrated deep remorse, and fully relied on fairness and humanism of the Soviet court. In some cases (if not in the majority of them) the defendant was aware of the meaninglessness of the attorney's involvement whose services would be paid from a small family budget. Per example, on the most high-profile political process of the late 1930s -"On the case of the Anti-Soviet Bloc of Rightists and Trotskyites" (Moscow, 2-12th March 1938) all of the accused, excluding the doctors -Lev Levin, Dmitrii Pletnev, Ignat Kazakov (the latter two shared the defender, N. V. Kommodov), had dismissed the lawyers' services before the trial began. After 11 days of the process, the floor was given only to two attorneys -N.D. Braude and N. Kommodov (session of 11th March). Both of them fully recognized the charges and only asked for empathy for the particular "criminals". In contrast to the victims of political repression of the Stalinist era, those accused in the trials of dissidents in the 1960s-1980s could count on legal assistance. However, the circle of attorneys admitted by the Soviet government to political trials was rather narrow. Most of them -for various reasons -cooperated with this government more or less. At the same time, individual attorneys of the late Soviet era honourably performed the difficult (and often dangerous for their own career as a lawyer) task of defending victims of communist political repression.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.