Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://er.dduvs.in.ua/handle/123456789/2011
Title: Theoretical and Semantic Determination of the Term “Electronic Justice”
Authors: Nalyvaiko, L.
Korshun, A.
Наливайко, Л.Р.
Корзун, А.
Keywords: взаємодія суду та громадянського суспільства
електронна держава
електронне правосуддя
електронне судочинство
електронний уряд
court and civil society interaction
e-justice
electronic judiciary
e-government
e-state
Issue Date: 2017
Publisher: ВНЗ «Університет сучасних знань»
Citation: Nalyvaiko L., Korshun A. Theoretical and semantic determination of the term «electronic justice» / L. Nalyvaiko, A. Korshun // Журнал східноєвропейського права. – 2017. – № 45. – С. 28-32.
Abstract: У статті здійснено семантичний аналіз терміну «електронне правосуддя» з позицій науки теорії держави і права. Вказується, що існують відмінності в підходах до розуміння сутності електронного правосуддя у вітчизняних та закордонних трактуваннях. Сформульовано визначення терміну «електронне правосуддя».
The article deals with the semantic analysis of the term “electronic justice” from the standpoint of the theory of state and law. It is pointed out that the concept of “e-justice” should be considered rather in relation to the notion of e-government or e-state since the triad of the most widely used terms – electronic justice, electronic judiciary and electronic court – can be interpreted as coordinate phenomena from the semantic and functional point of view. The notion which is meant by the term “e-justice” has not yet got its legal definition in domestic law. In scientific circles, where concepts such as “electronic justice” and “electronic court” are used as well, there is also no unity about the unification and content of these coordinate terms, which further complicates the understanding of the essence of the term “electronic justice” and how they relate to each other. Attention is drawn to the fact that there are some differences in approaches to understanding the essence of e-justice in various interpretations. Domestic interpretation, in contrast to foreign ones, does not emphasise the obligatory nature of expression in the electronic form of all procedural actions, but speaks of such a possibility only for those procedural actions for which there is a corresponding regulatory framework. The paper formulates the definition of the term “electronic justice”, which suggests understanding the totality of various automated information systems (services) that enable the court and other participants in the judicial process to carry out actions prescribed by the regulatory acts which are mediated by the electronic form of expression of procedural information and interaction between the participants of legal proceedings.
URI: http://er.dduvs.in.ua/handle/123456789/2011
Appears in Collections:Наливайко Л. Р.
НАУКОВІ СТАТТІ
Наукові статті из

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
5.1.pdf423,77 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.