District and Main Courts in Right-Bank Ukraine (1797–1831): Arrangement, Staffing and Activities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15407/uhj2021.04.050Keywords:
Right-Bank Ukraine, imperial policy of cooperation with the nobility, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth judicial procedure, district court, main court, staff, criminal and civil proceedingsAbstract
The purpose of the paper is to study the organization of the activities of the district and main courts in the Right-Bank Ukraine 1797–1831, their staff and legal practices are analyzed. The imperial power, seeking to gain the loyalty of the local nobility and to establish itself in the region, resumed certain elements of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth judicial system.
The research methodology is based on a combination of the general scientific (analysis, synthesis, generalization) and special-historical (historical-genetic, historical-comprehensive, historical-typological, prosopographical) methods with the principles of historicism, systematicity, scientificity, which made it possible to focus on the functioning of the judiciary in conditions of the imperial policy in looking for a compromise with the local nobility. The prosopographical method was used to analyze the personnel staff of courts.
The scientific novelty is that the study of the imperial procedure of granting concessions to the local nobility in the judicial field, subject to loyalty to the policy of the Center. The restored elements of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth judicial system convinced the elite to maintain its influence in the region, but at the same time, the authorities were correcting the activities of the courts.
Research results. Catherine II established the imperial judicial institutions in the Right-Bank Ukraine. The policy of Paul I was sounder one: he began to cooperate with the local nobility to maintain stability in the region. The main element of the agreements was the return of certain elements of the Polish-Lithuanian judicial tradition. Due to the activities of district courts, the nobility received the elected staff, the Polish language, the Lithuanian Statute and constitutions. These factors, along with the extension of jurisdiction to other population categories, convinced the nobility of their dominance. Provincial courts were established for the control and correction, which generally successfully reviewed criminal cases and appealed civil proceedings, ensuring comfort in the region.
References
Alekseeva, E. (2007). Diffuziya evropejskikh innovatsij v Rossii (XVIII – nachalo XX v). Moskva. [in Russian].
Bardakh, Yu., Lesnodorskij, B., Pietrchak, M. (1980). Istorija gosudarstva i prava Polshi. Moskva. [in Russian].
Berbenk, Dzh. (2004). Mestnye sudy, imperskoe pravo i grazhdanstvo v Rossii. Rossijskaya imperiya v sravnitelnoj perspective, 320–358. Moskva. [in Russian].
Dashkevych, Ya. (1996). Daniiel Bovua ta vyvchennia istorii polsko-ukrainskykh vidnosyn. Bovua D. Shliakhtych, kripak i revizor, 3–48. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Hurbyk, A. (2009). Liublinskyi trybunal. Entsyklopediia istorii Ukrainy, 6: La–Mi, 382. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Kamenskij, A. (2001). Ot Petra I do Pavla I: reformy v Rossii XVIII v. (opyt tselostnogo analiza). Moskva. [in Russian].
Kamenskij, A. (2004). Elity Rossijskoj imperii i mekhanizmy administrativnogo upravleniya. Rossijskaya imperiya v sravnitelnoj perspective, 115–139. [in Russian].
Karlina, O. (2011). Sklad i povnovazhennia mahistrativ povitovykh mist Volynskoi hubernii v pershii polovyni XIX st. Visnyk Chernihivskoho natsionalnoho pedahohichnoho universytetu, 87, 50–54. Chernihiv. [in Ukrainian].
Korotkikh, M. (1989). Samoderzhavie i sudebnaya reforma 1864 g. v Rossii. Voronezh. [in Russian].
Kovalova, S., Krumalenko, M., Muzychenko, P. (2004). Komentar. Statuty Velykoho kniazivstva Lytovskoho. Vol. III: Statut Velykoho kniazivstva Lytovskoho 1588 r., Kn. 2, 35–522. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Madariaga, I. de. (2002). Rossiya v epokhu Ekateriny Velikoj. Moskva. [in Russian].
Migunova, T. (2002). Pravo, administratsiya i sud v reformakh Ekateriny Velikoj. Sankt-Peterburg. [in Russian].
Migunova, T. (2008). “Dlya umnozheniya poryadka i besprepyatstvennogo techeniya pravosudiya...”. Administrativno-sudebnaya reforma Ekateriny II. Moskva. [in Russian].
Pisarkova, L. (1995). Rossijskij chinovnik na sluzhbe v kontse XVIII – pervoj polovine XIX v. Chelovek, 4, 147–158. [in Russian].
Pisarkova, L. (2007). Gosudarstvennoe upravlenie v Rossii s kontsa XVII do kontsa XVIII v.: Evolyutsiya byurokraticheskoj sistemy. Moskva. [in Russian].
Shandra, V. (2007). Formuvannia biurokratii v Pravoberezhnii Ukraini. Ukrainskyi istorychnyi zhurnal, 2, 143–158. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Shandra, V. (2011). Sovisni sudy v Ukraini (ostannia chvert XVIII – seredyna XIX st.). Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Shandra, V. (2013). Administratyvna ta sudova vidpovidalnist chynovnyka v zakonodavchykh aktakh Rosiiskoi imperii (do postanovky naukovoi problemy). Problemy istorii Ukrainy XIX – pochatku XX st., 22, 5–13. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Uortman, R. (2004). Vlastiteli i sudii: Razvitie pravovogo soznaniya v imperatorskoj Rossii. Moskva. [in Russian].
Usenko, I. (Ed.). (2014). Sudova vlada v Ukraini: istorychni vytoky, zakonomirnosti, osoblyvosti rozvytku. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
