EXPERT REVIEW OF DRAFT NORMATIVE LEGAL ACTS AS A TOOL FOR ENSURING THE QUALITY OF LAW-MAKING ACTIVITIES IN THE CONTEXT OF POST-WAR RECONSTRUCTION: CONCEPT, FUNCTIONS, TYPES

Abstract

The article presents a comprehensive study of the institution of legal expertise of draft normative legal acts as a key instrument for ensuring the quality of law-making activity in Ukraine amid post-war recovery and the progress of European integration. The functional purpose of legal expertise is revealed not only as a technical-legal procedure but also as an analytical, predictive, and human rights protection tool that ensures the effectiveness, legitimacy, and compliance of regulatory frameworks with contemporary challenges.Special attention is paid to the types of expertise stipulated in Article 44 of the Law of Ukraine "On Law-Making Activity," including legal, scientific, anti-corruption, gender legal, anti-discrimination expertise, as well as additional types such as digital, budgetary expertise, and expertise on compliance with the EU acquis and the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights. The study also examines methodological approaches to conducting legal expertise and outlines criteria for assessing the quality of expert support in law-making processes.A comparative analysis of approaches to legal expertise in Ukraine and EU member states is conducted, with emphasis placed on its role in harmonizing national legislation with the acquis communautaire of the European Union. It is emphasized that expert support is a safeguard against law-making errors, ensuring a balance between political expediency and legal certainty, as well as alignment of legal norms with the public interest.It is substantiated that under conditions of European integration and large-scale legal transformation, legal expertise of draft normative legal acts should be regarded as a mandatory and integral stage of the law-drafting process. The article highlights the need to strengthen the institutional mechanisms of legal expertise, particularly through the creation of independent expert bodies, the development of unified analysis standards, and the enhancement of the role of scientific institutions in ensuring the quality of law-making.