JUDGE REPUTATION AS A PREREQUISITE FOR SHAPING LEGITIMIZATION OF THE JUDICIARY

Abstract

The article provides a juridical analysis of the interpretation and positioning of the judge's reputation as a prerequisite for the formation of the legitimization of judicial power. It is motivated by the fact that the judicial power is a trigger of democratic society, therefore, in the context of legitimation, a significant factor is ensuring the reputation of the judge and the positive moral image of the judicial power in general. Access to court is a basic human right, moreover, it is a unique right, as it acts as a mechanism for ensuring all other basic human rights recognized by civilized nations. Therefore, the reputation of a fair arbiter of the subject of the exercise of the right to access to court is key for society. Through the judiciary as a law-enforcement body on behalf of the state, the rights and legitimate interests of citizens are protected, and the norms of law are implemented. And the peculiarity is that the specified analysis does not belong to the institution separately, or to the judge as a representative of the judicial system. It has been proven that reputation is a phenomenon of social reality that is closely related to the integrity of the judge. Axiological value is that people condition their behavior by moral reputation, which in turn is based on cultural norms. Moral evaluation of the judicial system, moral judgments about the judge is of great importance in the context of ensuring constitutionalism and liberal democracy in the state, creating a system of proper justice, and ensuring the principle of access to the court in accordance with European values. Here, it is important to ensure the proper moral reputation of each representative of the judiciary, which as a result will contribute to the legitimization of the judicial system by the public. It is emphasized that, in general, reputation is a significant legal and socio-political institution of the conglomerate type. It can be divided into individual and collective components. Collective reputation determines the status of the judiciary, but individual reputation affects the relative perception of judges by colleagues, participants in the judicial process, and the public.