OVERVIEW OF MONITORING FINDINGS IMPARTIALITY AND OBSERVANCE OF THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUALITY Constitution of Ukraine (Article 129): “The main principles of judicial proceedings shall be: …equality of all participants of a trial under the law and before the court…”. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 14): “All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. … everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a … impartial tribunal”. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Article 6): “…everyone is entitled to a fair … hearing … by an independent and impartial tribunal…”. Law of Ukraine On the Judiciary and Status of Judges (Articles 7 and 9 as of the time of conduction of the monitoring): “Everyone is guaranteed the protection of his\her rights, freedoms and interests … by an … impartial and fair court… Justice in Ukraine is administered on the basis of equality of all participants to a court process before the law and the court regardless of race, color, political, religious and other beliefs, gender, ethnic or social origin, property status, place of residence, language and other status… A court shall create such an environment where each participant of a court proceeding is guaranteed equality in the exercise of their procedural rights and in the performance of procedural duties, as determined by the procedural law”. In order to verify to which extent the courts complied with the requirements of impartiality and equality of arms, the monitors noted whether or not: • the presiding judge explained the right to demand the recusal of a judge; • the court did not ignore the age, general level of development, psychological and physical status of the trial participants when explaining to them their procedural rights; • the court heard the arguments of the participants of the trial in all the cases when it was provided for by the procedural law; • the court paid sufficient attention to the arguments or motions of the participants of the trial, and provided justifications when turning them down; • the court gave the participants the possibility to get familiarized with the evidence and other documents in the case provided they filed respective motions; • the court restricted the participants of the trial in their right to participate in a court debate (in those hearings, where such debate took place); • the court exercised moral pressure on the trial participants in the course of the hearing; • the court treated one of the parties in a friendlier way than the other. In 77% of cases the presiding judge informed the participants of their right to demand the recusal of a judge. In 95% of cases the court did not ignore the age, general level of development, psychological and physical status of the trial participants when explaining to them their procedural rights. 16 MONITORING OF ADHERENCE TO FAIR TRIAL STANDARDS IN UKRAINE