In the dissertation research on the basis of theoretical achievements in the field of philosophy, state studies, the theory of power, court system, procedural, constitutional law, as well as other branch sciences, existing international legal acts, domestic legislation, case law of the European Court of Human Rights, a comprehensive analysis of the features of the judicial authorities and formulated a number of theoretical positions, conclusions and practical recommendations aimed at the development of the institution of the judiciary, the judiciary, the improvement of the norms of the national law and enhance the credibility of the judiciary in Ukraine.
The author's approach to the key elements of the conceptual-categorical apparatus of the investigated sphere is proposed and author's definitions of the notions of «judicial authority» and «ensuring the confirmation of the signs of the judiciary» are formulated.
The factors that influence the establishment, definition of the signs of the judiciary and their understanding, based on the legal nature of the judiciary, its place and role in society, its purpose, the main tasks and organizational structure, are analyzed.
The systematic approach to the study of the institution of judicial power was applied and the modern theoretical views on the essence of the signs of judicial power as a social system are generalized. The feature and characterize the main features of the judiciary as a social system.
The author's vision for differentiating «signs of the judiciary» from the «principles of the judiciary» is given, which are heterogeneous and multivalued phenomena. It is concluded that to a greater extent they coincide in developed legal democratic countries, taking into account the peculiarities of the legal system, national development and traditions.
An attempt is made to generalize the study of the nature of the signs of public authority as a phenomenon of socio-legal reality and their normative consolidation. The main features of public power and their role for the judiciary are revealed.
It is argued that the improvement of the implementation or the approval of the signs of the judiciary directly depends on the improvement of the judiciary itself in the country. Established that the signs of the judiciary should be absolute, unchanged values, determined by the natural essence of the judiciary; however, each feature has instruments for measuring the degree of implementation and provision, respectively. In this regard, attention is focused on the possibility of improving the indicators that are measured by signs of the judiciary.
