FINDINGS OF THE MONITORING BY COURT TYPE CONCLUSIONS The findings of the monitoring show that the administrative courts observe the rules of procedure more often than the courts of general and commercial jurisdictions. The administrative courts also demonstrated higher scores of publicity, impartiality and culture of conducting judicial proceedings. It is important to note that commercial courts are the least ready for the publicity of judicial proceedings. Despite certain stereotypes related to the “elite” nature of commercial courts, the questionnaires of monitors did not confirm that the judges of these courts and trial participants demonstrate better conduct standards than in other courts. OBSERVANCE OF THE PROCEDURE 100 80 7% 48% 2% 6% 49% 36% poor 57% average 60 40 20 0 45% General courts 46% impeccable Commercial courts Administrative courts A striking difference in the application of settlement procedures by the courts of different jurisdictions became clear. According to the monitors, the first instance 5 courts took efficient measures to encourage General courts 4 the parties to settle in 61% of those cases where it was needed. Commercial courts did 3 Commercial the same in 89% of cases. At the same time, courts in administrative courts the monitors did 2 not note any cases of the kind despite the Administrative 1 existence of this concept in the respective courts procedural law. This phenomenon calls 0 for further investigation (for example, by verifying the efficiency of settlement activities based on the registry of court judgements or court statistics) and study. In case this conclusion is confirmed, the experience of commercial courts regarding settlement might be of interest to the courts of other jurisdictions. OBSERVANCE BY THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPLES OF PUBLICITY, IMPARTIALITY, EQUALITY OF ARMS AND THE CULTURE OF CONDUCTING JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS The higher the instance, the fewer violations the monitors noticed. 40 MONITORING OF ADHERENCE TO FAIR TRIAL STANDARDS IN UKRAINE