FORMS AND WAYS OF PROTECTION OF THE JUDGE’S RIGHT TO RESPECT FOR DIGNITY AND HONOR, THE RIGHT TO INVIOLABILITY OF THE BUSINESS REPUTATION VIOLATED IN THE MASS MEDIA

Abstract

The article is devoted to the issue of forms and ways of protecting the right of judges to respect for dignity and honor, the right to inviolability of business reputation violated in the mass media. In the article, based on the analysis of general theoretical views on the forms of civil legal protection, a conclusion was formed that a judge in the event of a violation of his right to respect for dignity and honor, the right to the inviolability of business reputation in the mass media, can protect the violated rights in court. Or by taking actions of self-defense, which are directly addressed to the offender (that is, to the mass media). According to the results of the study of the peculiarities of the judge’s protection of honor, dignity and business reputation, violated in the mass media, in a non-jurisdictional form, the conclusion was formed that, taking into account the requirement of tolerance to criticism, the judge is limited to the possibility of directly addressing the mass media only with a statement to refute inaccurate information. The only exception is the case of disseminating inaccurate information within the broadcast of a television and radio organization. Under these circumstances, along with the requirement to refute the disputed information, the judge can apply to the television and radio organization with a statement on the exercise of the right of reply and provide a comment on the widespread inaccurate information. When examining the features of the judge’s protection of honor, dignity, and business reputation violated in the mass media, in a jurisdictional form, it was emphasized that the judge’s exercise of the subjective right to protect honor, dignity, and business reputation, in a judicial procedure, is possible due to the dissemination of inaccurate information in the mass media. And also on the basis of expressing a subjective opinion about the judge in a brutal, humiliating or obscene manner, which degrades his dignity, honor, business reputation. The choice of the way of defense belongs to the judge, as the plaintiff in the case. In order to protect the violated rights, the judge can choose a general (termination of the action that violates the right, restoration of the situation that existed before the violation, compensation for moral (non-property) damage) and/or a special way of protection, defined within the limits of Art. 276–278 of the Civil Code of Ukraine (restoration of the violated personal non-property right; refutation of inaccurate information and the right to response; prohibition of dissemination of information that violates personal nonproperty rights). Along with this, it is emphasized that from the position of provisions, Part 2 of Art. 275 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, when protecting violated rights in court, the judge may choose any other way of protection in accordance with the content of this right, the manner of its violation and the consequences that caused this violation. However, the choice of one or another way of protection must be consistent with the provisions of normative legal acts and not violate the rights of other persons.