The development of digital justice is a global trend. At the initial stage of introducing digital technologies, States demonstrated noticeable restraint due to the specific nature of the administration of justice. However, over time, these technologies have proven their reliability and are now being actively integrated into law enforcement practice. The complexity of digitalizing criminal proceedings lies in the need for a comprehensive and systemic approach that takes into account technical, legal, organizational, and socio-humanitarian issues. This branch of law faces the greatest resistance to digital technologies, as it is here that fundamental human rights may be most significantly affected. Nevertheless, the gradual adaptation of society to the automation of legal matters is reducing distrust, transforming digital justice from an intimidating unknown into a comprehensible tool for ensuring legal certainty. Within the professional legal community and among participants in the judicial process, a generational shift is taking place: a new generation, accustomed to digitalization, is replacing those used to paper-based bureaucracy. It must be acknowledged that the digitalization of criminal proceedings is inevitable; however, technological progress is outpacing the doctrinal understanding of the changing nature of justice, creating a conflict between functional efficiency and classical procedural guarantees.

The object of the research is the social relations that arise during the application of digital technologies at the judicial stages of criminal proceedings. The subject of the research encompasses the norms of foreign and domestic legislation regulating electronic document management, remote participation in court sessions, and the use of artificial intelligence elements in judicial decision-making. The aim of this work is to conduct a comparative analysis of foreign experience in the digitalization of criminal proceedings at the judicial stages. The methodological basis of the study includes general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, induction) and specific legal methods, primarily the comparative legal method, which allowed for a comparison of approaches to digitalization in 15 post-Soviet countries (as a group with a common Soviet legacy) and 18 leading countries in the development of e-government.