Deputy Immunity: Through the Prism of Foreign Experience to Ukrainian Realities

The article deals with the issue of parliamentary immunity, in particular, indemnity and immunity, as key elements of protection of MPs from political persecution. The author analyses the international experience of parliamentary immunity and its restrictions in different countries, including Germany, Austria, Italy, Spain, Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, Slovenia, the United States of America and others. Particular attention is paid to the position of the Venice Commission, which recommends maintaining immunity in countries with transitional democracies. Examples of the cancellation of immunity in some countries, such as the Netherlands, Namibia and Malaysia, are also considered. The article analyses the changes in Ukrainian legislation that led to the abolition of parliamentary immunity in 2020 and discusses the possible consequences of this decision. It is also emphasised that the complete abolition of immunity may create risks for MPs, in particular in the form of political pressure. In this regard, the author substantiates the importance of preserving indemnity as a mechanism for protecting MPs’ freedom of speech and independence of their decisions. The article aims at finding a balance between the need to hold MPs accountable to the law and to protect their independence. The author separately examines the issue of removal of deputy immunity due to violation of professional and ethical standards, which is one of the main grounds for such actions. It is proved that the practice of developed democratic countries shows a tendency towards unification of standards of parliamentary immunities at the international level. A clear definition in the law of the conditions for holding MPs accountable may provide more transparency than the complete abolition of immunity, as is currently the case in Ukraine. Given the gaps and imperfections in the current legislation on this issue, the following areas of improvement should be outlined: introduce clear sanctions of disciplinary liability for violations, such as insult or defamation, and develop a mechanism for reasonable restriction of immunity. It is also worth paying attention to other problematic aspects in our country. In particular, corruption, which, despite the abolition of parliamentary immunity, still allows MPs to avoid responsibility for their actions. Keywords: parliamentary immunity, immunity, indemnity, parliament, people’s deputies.