The ombudsman institute in Ukraine and the problems of its constitutional and legal regulation

The article clarifies the historical aspects and current features of the constitutional regulation of the Ombudsman in Ukraine, analyzes attempts to amend the Constitution of Ukraine in 2019 regarding specialized parliamentary commissioners, provides an assessment of the legislative regulation of specialized commissioners in Ukraine, and makes its own proposals for further changes. It is concluded that the Ukrainian Parliamentary Ombudsman is a fairly strong institutional figure in the current constitutional system of Ukraine. It is proven that instead of the idea of creating specialized ombudsmen, including due to the impossibility of creating additional parliamentary ombudsmen in practice (Conclusion of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine dated November 20, 2019 No. 6-v/2019), the model of non-parliamentary ombudsmen has become quite widespread. It is justified that each case should be analyzed separately, because the concept of an ombudsman has gradually transformed into a broader model of a body that protects human rights (there are such concepts as “student ombudsman”, etc.). At the same time, in some cases, a certain competition with the traditional ombudsman is possible. We believe that a purely constitutional problem is important - what to do with the constitutional powers of certain higher bodies that appoint certain ombudsmen. If this issue is resolved with regard to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine by using Art. 117 of the Constitution (in accordance with Clause 10, it exercises other powers defined by the Constitution and laws of Ukraine), then with regard to the President of Ukraine, the issue remains open. On the one hand, Clause 28 of Article 106 of the Constitution allows the President to create “within the limits of the funds provided for in the State Budget of Ukraine, to exercise his powers, consultative, advisory and other auxiliary bodies and services”, on the other hand, the same Art. 106 (clause 31) clearly states that the powers of the President are determined exclusively by the Constitution itself. It was concluded that if the Ombudsman is not an advisory or consultative auxiliary body, then it should be constitutionalized in the Constitution itself with the right to appoint its head by the President.