Suchergebnisse

Осауленко С. В. ПОЛІТИЧНІ ПАРТІЇ ТА СВОБОДА ОБ'ЄДНАННЯ: ПРОБЛЕМИ ТЕРМІНОЛОГІЇУКРАЇНСЬКОЇ НАУКИ КОНСТИТУЦІЙНОГО ПРАВАЗміст конституційного права на свободу об'єднання в політичні партії в Україні є одним з елементів цьогосуб'єктивного права. Традиційно структура будь-якого суб'єктивного права аналізується за складом суб'єктівцього права, його об'єкта (об'єктів), а також змісту. При цьому конституційні суб'єктивні права не є винятком.Автор підкреслює, що такий підхід цілком виправданий і його слід дотримуватися.Досліджуючи зміст конституційного права на свободу об'єднання в політичні партії в Україні, постає питан-ня щодо розмежування понять «об'єднання» та «асоціація». Актуальність теми дослідження полягає в тому, щонаразі в Україні тривають євроінтеграційні процеси, які передбачають гармонізацію національного законодав-ства зі стандартами прав людини, прийнятими в ЄС. Саме в межах цих процесів автор аналізує та обґрунтовуєнеобхідність переходу до ширшого застосування поняття «асоціація» в національному законодавстві та україн-ській юридичній літературі.Дотепер фахівці з конституційного права не аналізували питання розмежування понять «асоціація» та «об'єд-нання» в контексті дослідження права на свободу об'єднання в політичні партії в Україні. З огляду на це, під часнаписання статті використано праці, присвячені загальним питанням теорії держави і права (зокрема, розробціпрофесорів Крестовської, Матвєєвої), а також загальним питанням конституційного права з точки зору суб'єктив-них прав (зокрема, розробки професорів Шаповала, Мішиної).Автор аргументує, що необхідно розрізняти поняття «асоціація» та «об'єднання» стосовно конституційногоправа на свободу об'єднань у політичні партії щодо України.Автор рекомендує відмовитися від використання поняття «об'єднання громадян» на користь поняття «асо-ціація» у ст. 36–37 Конституції України та привести у відповідність до Конституції України інші закони та під-законні акти, зокрема Закон «Про політичні партії в Україні», де у ст. 2 «Поняття політичної партії» надаєтьсятаке визначення. Перспективами подальших досліджень є використання того ж тезаурусу, який використовуютьіноземні науковці, які працюють у країнах ЄС, вивчаючи право на свободу об'єднання в політичні партії. ; The content of the constitutional right to freedom of association in political parties in Ukraine is one of the elementsof this subjective right. Traditionally, the structure of any subjective right is analyzed in the composition of the subjectsof this right, its object (objects), as well as the content, and constitutional subjective rights are not an exception to thisrule. It should be emphasized that this approach is fully justified and should be followed. In studying the content of theconstitutional right to freedom of association in political parties in Ukraine, the question of distinguishing between theconcepts of "union" and "association" arises.The relevance of the research topic is that European integration processes are currently underway in Ukraine,which provide for the harmonization of national legislation with human rights standards adopted in the EU. It is withinthese processes that the author analyzes and substantiates the need to move to a wider application of the concept of"association" in national legislation and Ukrainian legal literature.So far, experts in constitutional law have not analyzed the issue of distinguishing between the concepts of "union"and "association" in the context of the study of the right to freedom of association in political parties in Ukraine. Inthis regard, in writing the article used works devoted mainly to general issues of the theory of state and law (primarilythe development of professors Krestovskaya, Matveeva), as well as general issues of constitutional law in terms ofsubjective rights (primarily developed by professors Shapoval, Mishyna). We should also take into the account thedissertation for the degree of Candidate of Law, devoted to the constitutional right to unite in political parties, that wassubmitted by A.M. Moiseev on the materials of foreign law and case law.The author argues that the need to distinguish between the concepts of "union" and "association" in relation to theconstitutional right to freedom of association in political parties in Ukraine.The author recommends to abandon the use of the concept of "association of citizens" in favor of the concept of"association" in Art. 36-37 of the Constitution of Ukraine and bring other laws and bylaws in line with the Constitutionof Ukraine, first of all – the Law "On Political Parties in Ukraine", where in Art. 2 "The concept of a political party"gives this definition. Prospects for further research are to use the same thesaurus used by foreign scholars working inEU countries when studying the right to freedom of association in political parties in Ukraine

The article deals with the methodological aspects of the index "Freedom in the World", namely: 1. evolution of the methodological base, which partially changed over 45 years, since the Raymond Gastil index only began to be used to measure the level of freedom in the world; 2. each element of a three-tier ranking system consisting of scores (100-point scale), ratings (from 1 to 7), and status (free, partly free and not free countries/territories).The reports of "Freedom in the World" over the past few years are analysed and a comparative analysis of the global, regional and cross-temporal levels of research is developed.In the global comparison the dynamics of changes in the number of countries that are characterized by the corresponding status during the last five years of the study is shown, and the number of people in the world living in free, partly free and not free conditions is presented.A regional comparison of freedom in 6 regions, based on data presented in the study of Freedom House 2017, is conducted. The author graphically compares the regions.A cross-temporal comparison of Ukraine between 1992 and 2017 is developed, and the dynamics of growth and decline of the level of freedom in different years of Ukraine's independence is presented.The analysis of the "Freedom in the World" index by international scientific community is demonstrated, criticisms on the methodology of index, the selection of national experts for comparing reports in individual countries/territories, the choice of indicators and the process of evaluation as a whole are presented. It is also noted that the index despite the number of shortcomings is most adapted to modern realities. The methodology of index is used as a basis for building of new indexes of democratization. The data from "Freedom in the World" is used in researches by scientists and civic organizations around the world, and free availability of reports and ratings makes it the most accessible not only for scholars, but also for ordinary citizens interested in democratization processes in the world. ; У статті розглянуто методологічні аспекти одного з найбільш популярних та використовуваних у світі індексів – «Freedom in the World». Проведено компаративний аналіз на глобальному, регіональному та крос-темпоральному рівнях дослідження. Проаналізовано слабкі і сильні сторони методологічної бази індексу та їх вплив на якість вимірювання рівня свободи (демократизації) в окремих країнах, регіонах й у світі в цілому.

The editorial office of the Ukrainian Information Space has decided to publish the full article of the journalist of the UPA O. Hornovyi «On the freedom of press in the USSR» for the first time in Ukraine. The author of the article is a member of the main unit of propaganda during the OUN. He died in 1950 at the age of 29 in a battle with the KGB department near one of the shelters in Lviv region. This unique, virtually unknown to researchers and quite consistent with the current Ukrainian realities, text has a dramatic fate. It was published in 1946 on the front pages of the Ukrainian Main Liberation Council (UMLC) magazine «Independence». It was the only number, and it has not survived to this day. The text of the article was distributed in self-publishing on the territory of the Soviet Ukraine. In 1949 it was published a separate brochure in one of the underground UIA printing houses with the initial data «Kyiv-Lviv». The only surviving copy of this brochure in the scanned form was published on the website of the Electronic Archive of the Ukrainian Liberation Movement. However, the original of the brochure itself is rather damaged: it lacks several pages, and individual pages lack whole sections of text. Later, the article was reprinted in one of the issues of the so-called miniature brochures from the massif of subversive anti-Soviet literature, which was published on behalf of the UMLC Foreign Office in London and was illegally transported to the territory of Soviet Ukraine. A copy of this booklet was discovered by Professor Mykola Tymoshyk in the archives of the Ukrainian Publishing Union in London during a recent research internship in the United Kingdom. This document is the subject of editorial preparation for this publication. It analyzes the Soviet press in the context of the notion of press freedom in a democratic and totalitarian society. By giving a number of examples from the central and local Soviet press, the author identifies three features of Soviet journalism: a) the press in the USSR belongs ...

Some basic problems which are connected with the modern state of freedom realization as an inalienable attribute of democratic society are analysed. It is marked, that the freedom of any person appears as a result of his/her capacity for a reflection, making decision and determination of his/her own vital strategies in a globalized world. It is stressed that the essence of freedom is not only in realization of necessity, freedom is some active actions, overcoming of the state of passivity, inactivity, where the will of the person to gain freedom appears and various obstacles are overcome. It is underlined, that the burning question of present time is the question about the maintenance of freedom in technocratic society, where the problems of economy growth and ecological danger go out on a foreground in the conditions of crisis. It is marked, that the person is able to attain freedom, and, thus, to overcome alienation and appropriate his/her own products of vital activity only in a society, in the public process of production, when the personal and public interests of participants of joint activity gather, and the freedom of the person is determined by the degree of freedom of other people.

Introduction. The modern understanding of freedom is based on the neoliberal concept of negative freedom refers to economic subjects, that is, economic entities whose activities are aimed at realizing their own economic interests. The theoretical basis of the study was socio-philosophical and political science developments, as well as political and economic researches of H. Arendt, Z. Bauman, D. Bell, I. Berlin, F. Engels, K. Marx, D. North, P. Rosanvalon, A. Smith, J. Stiglitz, H. Hoppe, D. Harvey, and others. The aim and tasks are to substantiate the neoliberal denial of freedom and democracy in a globalized world, determining the causes of this process and outlining the possible consequences for society on the socio-philosophical basis. Research methods are the dialectical method in combination with general philosophical methods and methodological approaches (systematic, objectivity, ascent from the abstract to the concrete, correspondence, and relativity). Research results. At the heart of the neoliberal denial of freedom and democracy there is the postmodern denial of modern culture, the rejection of its values. Postmodern consciousness decrowns the mind, rational authorities, in particular, the political and legal, democratic ideals of Modern. The modern understanding of freedom is based on the concept of negative freedom, which is understood as exclusively economic freedom realized on the principle of laissez-faire, that is, non-interference in the sphere of economic relations. But by promoting postmodern "freedom from everything", the adherents of negative freedom not only destroy the sphere of the positive freedom, but also level the existence of the negative one, i.e. private. The neoliberal agenda, mixing the spheres of private and public thus denies positive and negative freedom and the principle of laissez-faire - the classical principles of liberalism, a democratic form of government, the nation-state, and so on. This agenda is absolutely hostile to anything that contradicts the utilitarianism of ...

Свобода – одна з головних проблем будь-якої епохи. Про неї писали Арістотель, Платон, Епіктет, намагалися її пояснити Дун Скот, Августин, Абеляр, Вільям Окам. Особливо великий внесок зробили філософи німецької класичної філософії, серед яких – Імануїл, Кант, Фрідріх Шелінг, Георг, Гегель. Нове розуміння свободи здійснили Микола Бердяєв, Еріх Фром, Віктор Франкл, Жан-Поль Сартр, Макс Шелер, Карл Ясперс. Свобода як атрибут людського буття не здобула вартісного феноменологічного, діалектичного аналізу. Не стала вона й предметом належних філософських рефлексій.Increased influence on the lives of people in the XXI century destabilizing factors, political, economic and ideological crises, man-made and natural disasters, and the effects of anomalies universal information society ) and the inability of people to cope with them provokes new consider freedom. This situation Viktor Frankl «Existential anxiety», which is interpreted as a crisis man who has lost the object and purpose of life, and that spiritually degrading. Such circumstances exacerbate the need and urgency to modern man in understanding the relationship itself to the world. The article compares the different theories of freedom from antiquity to modern times. Established that freedom has always been a subject for thought and reflection philosophers, but it is not always able to comprehend at a decent level. The article had a philosophical analysis of the freedom of the human being and examined the relationship of freedom and personality. Analyzed the essence of self-responsibility as the foundation of freedom, which is attribute of human existence. Accordingly , we conclude about the extraordinary importance of freedom in the twenty – first century despite the various dangers that may await humanity

Problem setting. Human rights and freedoms are an essential part of building a democratic state. In turn, freedom of speech is a basic value of a democratic state. At the same time, modern democratic countries, facing terrorist and information threats, becoming information war objects, are forced to adjust the realization legal parameters of the freedom of speech, especially in the media. Recent research and publications analysis. Variety of law, philosophical and political science publications are devoted to problems of the freedom of speech ensuring in conditions of «hybrid» and information wars, the permanent terrorist threat, and armed conflicts. Paper objective. This research aims on highlighting the freedom of speech realization problem in current information and «hybrid» wars, as well as on revealing the features of the relationship between freedom of speech and security measures in democratic states. Paper main body. Nowadays, informational confrontation, information attacks and wars have become the dominant component in the struggle for global leadership. World democracies face the problem of comprehensive freedom of speech implementation on the one hand, and on the other hand – maintaining the safe state existence in conditions of «hybrid» wars, negative informational effects on public consciousness and spiritualcultural area of the country. In different countries of the world, the beginning of the XXI century events have clearly shown that by means of social networks, it is possible to carry out information attacks against entire nations in order to destabilize the situation, create an auspicious spiritual and psychological climate for the further manipulative actions, destructive influence on existing political and economic systems, legal, spiritual, cultural and other relations, which ultimately leads to the destabilizing of state, information, political and economic sovereignty of the country. To date, in scientific and expert circles, the main criteria have been developed, whereby it is determined ...

The conceptual basis of Aristotle's interpretation of freedom and citizen has been considered. It has been found out that freedom by Aristotle had been directly connected with a conscious choice, an intelligent activity, kindness, political activity, having a purposeful motive for a good-happiness. It has been shown that a status of a citizen was defined by virtue, freedom, material well-being and political activity. Importance and nature of conscious choice and its conditionality by a language practice of a city state life and human experience have been taken into account. Differences between a city state, public life as a sphere of freedom and equality and private, economic life as a sphere of compulsion and subordination have been shown. Status of a woman in public and private measurements of an antique city state has been considered. Key words: citizen, public sphere, private sphere, conscious choice, virtue, freedom. ; Розглянуто концептуальні засади тлумачення понять свободи та громадянина у вченні Аристотеля. З'ясовано, що свобода в концепції Аристотеля прямо пов'язана зі свідомим вибором, розумною діяльністю, доброчесностями, політичною активністю та має цільову спонуку до блага-щастя. Окреслено, що статус громадянина визначають доброчесність, свобода, матеріальні статки та політична активність. Враховано значення і природу свідомого вибору та його зумовленість мовною практикою полісного життя і досвідом людини. Виявлено відмінності між полісним, громадським життям як сферою свободи і рівності та приватним, господарським життям як сферою примусу й підпорядкування. Розглянуто статус жінки в громадському та приватному вимірах античного полісу. Ключові слова: громадянин, громадська сфера, приватна сфера, свідомий вибір, чеснота, свобода.

У статті йдеться про надзвичайну ємність, динамічність та суперечливість категорії "свобода", чим можна пояснити дещо поверхневу оцінку її проявів органами державного управління. ; The article is about the extraordinary capacity, dynamics and contradictory of «freedom» category that, we assume, may explain some of the gaps in its study and a bit superficial assessment of its manifestation by state authorities. The possible way out seems in changing attitude of state officials to the problems of people's free willing, improving the culture of human cognition that in proper shall lead to the transition to rational and ethic self-determination issuing the comprehension in one's cognitive system of positioning contradicting to this system and making an optimal attitude to it.

Introduction. Modern civilization both in a scientific-theoretical discourse and in an assessment by the persons not involved in science but with an active public position is endowed with such characteristics as crises, risks, dangers. At the same time, the cause of all the many crisis processes and phenomena in the modern consumer society as a product of the industrial era is bankrupting, first of all, in the field of value and motivational and volitional aspects of human activity. Now targets of all types of human activities, including health preservation, are permanently dependent on the imperatives of consumer profitability.Purpose: to investigate the specifics of the individual's health-preservation activity in a light of the dialectical categories of "freedom" and "necessity".Methods. Health is a complicated and multifaceted phenomenon the study of which requires a complex methodology that integrates the techniques of classical and non-classical philosophy. The methodological basis of this article is a comparative approach which made it possible to analyze the interaction of the dialectical categories "freedom" and "necessity" in health preservation in today's consumption society.Results. In everyday life, freedom is likened to being able to make a choice. At the same time, it should be remembered that having a choice is only an outward sign of freedom. The qualitative characteristics of choice and therefore of the freedom of action in health preservation will always be determined by a number of existing opportunities and conventionalities that are grouped around knowledge about health, values, and money of a certain social entity. It is also important to take into account the important fact that in the space of consumption the freedom of choice in health-preserving activity often goes with stimulative practices on the part of manufacturers and suppliers and, as a consequence, formal health-preserving action on the part of a consumer.Conclusions. It would be too naive to think about humankind's immediate awareness of the need to create a global health-preserving paradigm based on healthy consumption. For such an optimistic development of events, modern civilization is too divergent in its socio-economic, geographical, political components. Now in Ukraine, the health-preserving activity of average consumers is carried out in the illusory freedom format provided by a wide variety of goods and services. Incompetence, dishonesty, uncontrollability in the production and quality of goods and services demonstrate the imaginableness of freedom on all matters pertaining to human health. At the same time, an objective need arises to be healthy in order to live a dignified life with creative inspiration and to raise our children with dignity. Unfortunately, today the quality of health-preserving activity of Ukrainians is exclusively in the space of their own actions and their personal responsibility.

The article is devoted to determining the place of the right to information in the system of communicative freedoms, specifying the scope of constitutional protection and clarifying the criteria for its restriction. During the research a wide range of general scientific and special-legal methods of scientific knowledge was used, in particular: logical, historical, comparative-legal and system-structural methods of research. The analysis of domestic and German legal literature on the right to information was important for achieving the goal of the study. The study of the decisions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the decisions of the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany devoted to the interpretation of this fundamental human right was of particular cognitive importance. As a result of the study, the author states that the right to information belongs to the system of communicative freedoms. As a separate communicative freedom, it actively interacts with other freedoms, such as freedom of expression, freedom of the press, freedom of cinema, and so on. At the same time, the right to information is subordinated to the general goal of communicative freedoms – to be an instrument of communication of an individual with society, a real opportunity to express and convey his views, beliefs and opinions to other individuals. The right to information protects access to public information not by a particular group of individuals, but by the corresponding right of each individual. In addition, this right should not be construed as a right to restrict access to certain information. Given this, the scope of protection of the right to information is to protect the right of everyone to access information that is in publicly available sources of information. Such information is the source for forming the views and beliefs of individuals. The appropriate approach should be reflected in the following interpretative acts of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine on the interpretation of the right to information. This fundamental human right may be restricted. However, such interference in the exercise of this right of individuals should not turn into its complete leveling, turning it into fiction. Therefore, along with the purely normative grounds for restricting the right to information, additional criteria are defined according to which each individual case of restriction of this right of individuals must be assessed. Keywords: information, communication freedom, human rights, sphere of protection, restriction of human rights

The article examines the problem of restriction of political rights and freedoms. It is emphasized that the protection against unlawful restrictions on political rights and freedoms is particularly important for the functioning of direct and mediatory democracy. The meaning of the concept of «restriction of rights and freedoms» is analyzed. The article addresses the basic principles which should not be violated when the restriction of rights and freedoms is applied. To achieve this goal, the author analyzes the rules of domestic law, the practice of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, the rules of international law governing these issues. The author differentiates political rights and freedoms into those that may be restricted in accordance with the provisions of the Basic Law of Ukraine and those that are not subject to any restrictions; features of realization of political rights and freedoms in comparison with other groups of rights, such as social and economic, cultural are defined. Some of the political rights and freedoms that may be restricted are analyzed and ways to restrict them are identified, in particular: the right to join political parties, suffrage, the right to peaceful assembly, rallies, marches and demonstrations, the right to equal access to public service, freedom words, thoughts, views and beliefs. It is noted that from the standpoint of the ECHR it is important to check whether the possibility of restricting the exercise of the right was provided by law; whether the purpose of such a restriction is legitimate; whether such a restriction is necessary in a democratic society. The legitimate grounds for restricting human rights enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine have been identified: public health; social necessity; rights, freedoms and dignity of citizens; public order; economic well-being; national security; territorial integrity; morality of the population. It is emphasized that in accordance with the practice of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, the restriction of the content and scope of rights and freedoms should be considered as a restriction. It is important that all restrictions were established exclusively by the constitution; were not arbitrary and unjust; the law restricting human rights must be of a general nature; restrictions must be proportionate and justified; they must optimally achieve a legitimate goal with minimal interference in the exercise of rights or freedoms, not to violate the essential content of the relevant right. It is determined that special qualification requirements for holding public positions, as well as participation in the electoral process (implementation of active and passive suffrage) cannot be considered restrictions. It is emphasized that the state, represented by its organs, should refrain from unjustified interference with political rights (for example, from discriminatory restrictions on the suspension of political rights of prisoners, violation of electoral secrecy of the ballot); take measures against possible violations of political rights by third parties (individuals, companies, etc.). It is concluded that restrictions on the exercise of political rights of individuals can be introduced either in favor of guaranteeing the rights of other individuals, or in favor of ensuring the functioning of the state. The legitimate exercise of political rights can be restricted only if the general conditions for interfering with fundamental human rights are met.

The aim of the article is to research and make a socio-legal analysis of the doctrine and provisions of law on the essence of creative freedom concept, to define creative features and correlation between creative freedom and the concept of cultural and public morals. General scientific and special methods of researching were used to ensure identification and combination of analysis, theoretical and practical problematic aspects arose in social and legal understanding of the right to creative freedom. The research enables to make conclusion on the essential dimensions of freedom and creativity, to identify attributes of creativity and to determine a correlation between creative freedom, culture and public morals at the legislative level. The rapid development of intellectual property area determines relevance of the study. New objects of intellectual property rights appear and they need recognition and legal protection. Innovation support imminently leads to society progress. Many constitutions of modern states mention intellectual property associated with creative work which is reflected in a set of relevant rights and responsibilities. This fact emphasizes the importance of creative freedom and intellectual property in the modern world as well as the relevance of creativity research. Since creativity is not a permanent phenomenon, it is developing rapidly and many contradictions arise on the way. All of them need to be resolved. Creativity is reflected in different approaches, but there are common features that have been reviewed in the article. Correlation between creative work and cultural activity are described. The essential dimensions of the right to creative freedom as a personal non-proprietary right are outlined. It is determined that the cultural heritage of previous generations is the basis for the creation of any object of intellectual property rights, but the results of intellectual creativity, which are produced today and will be produced in the future, are important as well. The number and variety of creative results show the need to improve legislation in their sphere of application. ; Метою статті є дослідження та соціально-правовий аналіз доктрини та положень законодавства щодо суті поняття свободи творчості, визначення ознак творчості та співвідношення свободи твор-чості з поняттям культури та суспільної моралі. Для дослідження були використані загальнонаукові і спеціальні методи, що забезпечило виявлення та поєднання аналізу, теоретичних та практичних проблемних аспектів, що виникають у соціальному та правовому розумінні права на свободу твор-чості. У результаті дослідження були сформовані висновки щодо сутнісних вимірів понять свободи та творчості, виявлені характерні ознаки творчості, охарактеризовано співвідношення свободи творчості, культури та суспільної моралі на законодавчому рівні. Актуальність дослідження також зумовлена тим, що сфера інтелектуальної власності стрімко розвивається. З'являються нові об'єкти права інтелектуальної власності, які потребують визнання та правової охорони. Підтримання іннова-цій неминуче приводить до прогресу в суспільстві. У багатьох конституціях сучасних держав ідеться про інтелектуальну власність, пов'язану із творчою працею, що знаходить своє відображення в пев-ній сукупності відповідних прав і обов'язків. Ця обставина підкреслює значення свободи творчості, інтелектуальної власності в сучасному світі, актуальність дослідження теми творчості. Оскільки твор-чість не є сталим явищем, вона стрімко розвивається і на своєму шляху стикається із суперечностями, які потребують вирішення. Творчість знаходить своє відображення в різних підходах, але є загальні ознаки, які були висвітлені у статті. Охарактеризовано співвідношення творчості та культурної діяль-ності. Окреслені сутнісні виміри права на свободу творчості як особистого немайнового права особи. Визначено, що основою створення будь-якого об'єкта права інтелектуальної власності є культурні надбання попередніх поколінь, але не менш важливі й результати інтелектуальної творчої діяльності, які створюються нині і будуть створюватися в майбутньому. Кількість та різноманітність результатів творчості роблять очевидною потребу вдосконалення законодавства у сферах їх використання.

The article deals with freedom of speech as a spiritual dimension of being: moral emotions, conscience. The author outlined the indissolubility of freedom and necessity, freedom and responsibility for the written, oral and television image. It is emphasized that freedom of speech is a category not so much philosophical but political. Throughout the democratic world, it is an essential factor in the natural development of society on the basis of the constitutional order. Based on the analysis of media functioning it was emphasized, that freedom is a kind of political and civic oxygen of the media, because their main purpose is to create the preconditions for formation of moral and spiritual, educated, intellectually rich society. It is shown that freedom is the greatest moral and spiritual state of man. Under the banner of freedom, Ukrainian soldiers defend the independence of the State from Russian invaders. In connection with the Russian Federation aggression against Ukraine the principles and the functions of the media were re-understood, features of freedom and standards of journalistic creativity in historical and contemporary socio-political context were outlined. The author drew attention to the works of Professor M. Tymoshyk who was the researcher of creativity of the publicist, politician and diplomat Yevhen Onatskyi, who put the interests of the nation first in the fight against Ukrainian enemies, not one of its classes, the interests of the state, not of any party. These professional standards of journalism are all too important in the current era of globalization and hybrid warfare. Therefore, the standards of journalistic profession should be treated not traditionally, not stereotyped but unusual, creative, to promote victory over the enemy and approve of the spiritually united Ukrainian Ukraine. Freedom of speech, standards of the journalistic profession cannot be a tool for manipulating public consciousness in the interests of the aggressor. It should be based on the philosophy of ...