Problems of normative regulation of extra-budgetary funding of local courts: legal assessment of charitable assistance, grants, and targeted contributions

Introduction. Chronic underfunding of Ukraine’s judiciary undermines its institutional independence and effectiveness. Although Article 130 of the Constitution obliges the state to ensure proper funding for courts, the projected financing level for 2025 covers only 56.5% of the actual needs, leading to a reliance on extrabudgetary resources. This situation generates risks of both real and perceived external influence, thereby eroding public trust in judicial impartiality. The purpose of the paper is to provide a thorough legal assessment of the current regulatory framework governing the extrabudgetary financing of local courts in Ukraine-particularly through charitable donations, grants, and targeted contributions. The objective is to identify legal gaps, institutional vulnerabilities, and compliance issues with international standards. Results. The study revealed systemic legislative deficiencies: the lack of a dedicated regulatory mechanism for judicial extrabudgetary funding; an absence of explicit provisions recognizing courts as eligible recipients of charitable aid; and inconsistent application of budgetary, accounting, and tax regulations. These gaps hinder transparency, complicate oversight, and expose courts to reputational and corruption risks. Additionally, the legal framework does not ensure safeguards against potential conflicts of interest or undue influence from donors, including those engaged in judicial proceedings. Comparative analysis confirms that Ukraine’s current model diverges from best European practices, which restrict non-state funding to clearly defined and transparently regulated international projects. Conclusion. The regulatory uncertainty surrounding extrabudgetary financing of courts in Ukraine constitutes a serious threat to the independence and integrity of the judiciary. To address these risks, urgent legislative reform is required to define permitted funding sources, establish control mechanisms, and ensure alignment with international standards. Only through a comprehensive and transparent legal approach can financial independence and public trust in the judiciary be restored.