Тлумачення права: проблеми визначення поняття, складу, практичної потреби

Abstract

Стаття покликана розкрити поняття, склад, практичну потребу і межі тлумачення права. Автори зробили спробу внести нові аспети розуміння тлумачної діяльності у зв’язку з практикою правозастосування. Особливої увавги приділено особливостям природи судового тлумачення права. У статті зроблено висновок, що під тлумаченням права слід розуміти раціональну діяльність стосовно розкриття змісту, правового тексту або ж конструювання судом норм у випадку наявності логіко-структурних дефектів у праві (колізій, "прогалин)" чи емпліцидного характеру його окремих сегментів для вирішення конкретної юридичної справи. Ключові слова: право, тлумачення права, права людини, юридична практика, методи тлумачення.

The article aims to reveal the concept, composition, practical need and limits of law interpretation. The authors have attempted to bring new aspects of interpretive activities understanding in relation to the law enforcement practice. Peculiar attention is paid to the particular nature of the judicial interpretation of law. The article concludes that the interpretation of law should be understood as the rational activity in revealing the content of legal text or the construction of rules by the court in the case of logical and structural defects in the law (conflicts, "gaps") or the implicit nature of its individual segments - to resolve specific legal affairs. In view of such understanding of the type of legal activity, the authors note several key points. Firstly, the purpose of interpreting law is the objective content (meaning) of the law, incorporated in the text or designed by a court to resolve a legal case. Judicial interpretation is not limited to intellectual tasks and should be distinguished from legal advice (providing an advisory opinion). The practical need for the interpretation of law reflects the essential nature of law, its overt formulations (general categories) and responds to the task of practical applying law and resolving in such a way a legal case. Secondly, the limits of interpretation are determined by the procedural requirements for a court decision (proper justification) and, in particular, by the substantive requirements of its alignment with the basic values of the legal system, which are concentrated in the text of the constitution. In other words, a reasoned interpretation cannot conflict with the requirements of the constitution, first and foremost, respect for human rights. Thirdly, in the absence of favoring certain methods of the law interpretion in the jurisprudence and the doctrine, their application requires complexity (starting from the textual method), but certainly in compliance with the rule of constitutional-conformal interpretation of legal acts, that is, the results of which are consistent with the content of the constitution (if applicable). In addition, the traditional toolkit of methods for law interpretation requires a gradual update, based in particular on the global interaction of law and order (national, supranational and international). It is a comparative legal method of interpreting law, which is the product of the "dialogue" of various jurisdictions in the modern world. Key words: law, interpretation of law, human rights, legal practice, methods of interpretation.