SOME ASPECTS OF HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION IN THE FACE OF ARMED CONFLICT

Abstract

In the article the authors consider the activity of the state executive service and the institute of private performers, their similar and distinctive features. The historical way to the formation of the current mixed system of enforcement of decisions is investigated. It is noted that the activities of the state executive service, even with the introduction of the institution of private performers, have remained overburdened due to restrictions on the decisions that a private performer can perform. It is worth noting that the relevance and timeliness of this issue is that the state for such a period of time (since 2016) has not yet balanced the powers between private and public. Similar features were considered between the two systems, which are expressed in compliance with the principles in carrying out their activities, guided by one main task are also identical activities in enforcement, decision-making in the Automated System of Enforcement Proceedings, deadlines for decisions on enforcement proceedings, legal significance of requirements and requests. It is emphasized that the reasons for the low efficiency of the system of enforcement of court decisions in Ukraine include the fact that for a short historical period of its formation and development, it has undergone repeated changes in legal status, which also did not contribute to its overall prosperity. It is established that the difference between the state executive service and private executors, which is defined in the requirements for holding the position of state executor or acquiring the status of private executor, sources of funding for their activities, implementation of decisions that private executor can not execute. A private executor, unlike a state executor, does not have the status of a civil servant, is a subject of independent professional activity. By its nature, its activities will be similar to those of a lawyer or private notary.