КРИТЕРІЇ ВИМІРУ ЕФЕКТИВНОСТІ ЗАСТОСУВАННЯ ПРАВОВОГО ЕКСПЕРИМЕНТУ
Abstract
Determining the effectiveness of a legal experiment is one of the most important and, at the same time, complex issues of theoretical and methodological nature, which has a decisive practical significance. Domestic jurisprudence does not have an unambiguous answer regarding the set of indicators and criteria for determining its effectiveness. Instead, there is a prevailing view that the evaluation of a legal experiment should take place first of all by comparing the actual state of legal reality, which was achieved taking into account the effect of experimental legal norms with the reference and the desired state. The purpose of the article is to analyze the tools of the effectiveness of legal norms through a comparative analysis of comparisons and comparisons, expected and objective aspects of legal reality. A simple comparison is a relatively weak tool of scientific knowledge in terms of the need to form a proper idea of the effectiveness of public authorities, which are determined to be competent and responsible for conducting a legal experiment, as well as for adjusting the methodology. Similarly, the comparison does not provide a thorough answer to the completeness of the disclosure of the regulatory potential of the rules of law being tested. There is no doubt that comparison is a way of obtaining information and feedback from the state and legal regulation system, which is formed under the influence of the relevant experiment. Thus it is unalterable in terms of the initial assessment of the results of its implementation. Instead, for a more systematic analysis of the process of legal experiment, identifying shortcomings of both the process and the rules of law being tested, as well as to assess the effectiveness of the state of legal reality formed under its influence, it is necessary to find more accurate evaluation criteria.
