Theoretical and Methodological Foundations of the Concept of Digital Transformation in Criminal Proceedings

V. I. Przhilenskiy

doi:10.17803/2713-0533.2026.1.35.001-022

Theoretical and Methodological Foundations of the Concept of Digital Transformation in Criminal Proceedings

V. I. Przhilenskiy

https://doi.org/10.17803/2713-0533.2026.1.35.001-022

Full Text:

PDF (Eng)

Generate QR code

Abstract

The article addresses issues related to the necessity of developing a concept for the evolution of Russian criminal proceedings under conditions of digital transformation of society and state, as well as theoretical and methodological problems associated with defining the digitization of the national judicial system. A detailed analysis is conducted on contemporary socio-philosophical, sociological, managerial, and legal theories that could serve as a basis for solving these tasks. The author identifies and describes explanatory capabilities of several modern theoretical constructs, namely the theory of sociotechnical systems, communicative action theory, theory of social construction of reality, justice theory. Additionally, self-learning organizations theory, game theory, and decision-making theory are also examined. Various strategies for using concepts such as goal setting, systems, lifeworld, communication, legitimation, justice, efficiency, formulas, and principles proclaimed through the application of these theories during conceptualization are justified.

Keywords

sociotechnical systems, communicative action, life-world, construction of reality, decision making, justice, effectiveness

About the Author

V. I. Przhilenskiy

Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL)
Russian Federation

Vladimir I. Przhilenskiy, Dr. Sci. (Philosophy), Professor, Department of Philosophic and Socio-Economic Disciplines

Moscow

References

1. Abbas, R. and Michael, K., (2025). Socio-Technical Theory: A review. In: Papagiannidis, S., ed. Theory. Hub Book. Available at: https://open.ncl.ac.uk [Accessed 12.03.2026].

2. Baklanov, I. and Baklanova, E., (2025). Social norm as a functional basis of sociality: the problem of formation and maintenance of traditions. Patria, 2(1), pp. 75–88, doi: 10.17323/3034-4409-2025-2-1-75-88. (In Russ.).

3. Berger, P.L. and Luckmann, Th., (1966). The Social Construction of Reality A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Penguin Books.

4. Brazevich, D.S. and Zavaritskaya, O.V., (2016). Taking into account the human factor in the practice of functioning of socio-technical systems. Economy and Society, 7(26), pp. 42–46.

5. Burdina, E.V. and Chizhov, M.V., (2023). Organizational and legal models of judicial activity in the context of the platformization of justice: the experience of Russia and other BRICS countries. Journal of Russian Law. 27(10), pp. 116–129. (In Russ.).

6. Burdina, E.V. and Kornev, V.N., (2024). Technologies versus justice: challenges of AI regulation in the judicial system. Legal Issues in the Digital Age, 2, pp. 113–126. (In Russ.).

7. Dragilev, E.V., Dragileva, L.L., Drovaleva, L.S. and Palamarchuk, S.A., (2022). Informatization of the judicial system of China. Legal Science, 8, pp. 54–59.

8. Geels, F.W., (2010). Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective. Research Policy, 2, 39(4), pp. 495–510.

9. Gintciak, A., Burlutskaya, Zh., Zubkova, D. and Uspenskiy, M., (2024). The Application of Ontology-Based Game Theory for Decision Support in Sociotechnical Systems. Sustainable Development and Engineering Economics, 3(13), pp. 65–73, doi: 10.48554/SDEE.2024.3.5.

10. Habermas, J., (1987). The Theory of Communicative Action. The Critique of Functionalist Reason. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

11. Hoffmann, A., et al., (2015). Legal Compatibility as a Characteristic of Sociotechnical Systems Goals and Standardized Requirements. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 57(2), pp. 103–113.

12. Kimelev, Yu.A., (2021). Jurgen Habermas’s Concept of Postmetaphysical Thinking. Social Sciences and Humanities. Domestic and Foreign Literature. Series 3: Philosophy. Abstract Journal, 2, pp. 188–206, doi: 10.31249/rphil/2021.02.11. (In Russ.).

13. Murrell, P.H., Schneider, G.F. and Gould, PhD., (2009). Courts as learning organizations: Towards a unifying vision. Judicature, 93, p. 14 (July-Aug).

14. Rawls, J., (1999). A Theory of Justice. Revised Edition. Cambridge; Massachusetts: The Belknap Press, Harvard University Press.

15. Sergeev, S.F., (2022). Methodology of Evaluation of Evolving Sociotechnical Systems with Artificial Intelligence. Mechatronics, Automation, Control, 23(4), pp. 171–176, doi: 10.17587/mau.23.171-176. (In Russ.).

16. Shchedrovitsky, G.P., (1992). “Natural” and “Artificial” in Sociotechnical Systems. Questions of Methodology, 1–2.

17. Tayursky, A.I. and Belova, E.N., (2014). Management Infrastructure of a Networked Self-Learning Organization of a University. Kazan Pedagogical Journal, 5(106), pp. 18–28. (In Russ.).

18. Zakharova, M. and Przhilenskiy, V.I., (2019). Anti-Rawls or the Russian Way of Eurasian Integration. Russian Law Journal, 7(3), pp. 12–37, doi: 10.52783/rlj.v7i3.59.

19. Zakharova, M.V., (2025). Law in the postmodern era: cases of life and death. Baikal Research Journal, 16(2), pp. 436–446, doi: 10.17150/2411-6262.2025.16(2).436-446. (In Russ.).

Review

For citations:

Przhilenskiy V.I. Theoretical and Methodological Foundations of the Concept of Digital Transformation in Criminal Proceedings. Kutafin Law Review. 2026;13(1):1-22. https://doi.org/10.17803/2713-0533.2026.1.35.001-022

JATS XML