Challenges in ensuring the right to fair trial and access to justice under martial law

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to conduct a comprehensive study of the problems of ensuring the right to a fair trial and access to justice in criminal proceedings in Ukraine under martial law. Particular attention is paid to the impact of extraordinary circumstances on the implementation of the fundamental principles of criminal procedure, namely the principles of access to justice, adversarial proceedings, equality of parties before the law and the court, and the right to defence.

The methodological basis of the study includes general scientific (analysis, synthesis, generalization) and special legal methods (comparative legal, formal legal, method of generalization of judicial practice). The author also actively uses the case law of the European Court of Human Rights as an important benchmark for assessing national criminal justice.

The research reveals that martial law significantly complicates the realization of the right to a fair trial. Three main groups of problems are identified: institutional (change of territorial jurisdiction, evacuation and temporary suspension of court activities, impossibility of administering justice in occupied territories), organizational and technical (unstable operation of the videoconferencing system, lack of adequate shelters), and procedural (complications in exercising the right to legal assistance, restrictions on the principles of adversarial proceedings and equality of arms, issues of admissibility and evaluation of evidence obtained in combat conditions).

Special attention is paid to the risks of violating the right to defence due to restricted access of lawyers to suspects/accused persons, as well as the specifics of evaluating evidence obtained in active combat zones. It is proven that even under martial law, the state is obliged to maintain a reasonable balance between national security interests and compliance with fundamental procedural guarantees enshrined in Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

The conclusions substantiate the need to further improve criminal procedural legislation, introduce clear standards for remote court proceedings, strengthen guarantees of the right to defence, and develop special criteria for assessing the admissibility of evidence obtained in combat conditions. It is emphasized that the principles of criminal procedure must remain inviolable even under extraordinary legal regimes, as they constitute the main guarantee of fair justice and the protection of human rights.