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.

Criminal justice systems sometimes err; such errors occur in every country, regardless of variations in legal and judicial systems and despite measures implemented to prevent them. Erroneous decisions are usually called unreasonable. This is not entirely true, because court decisions, irrespective of later reassessment, are evidence-based conclusions that represent the decision-maker’s belief about the circumstances of the case. Gettier cases, which challenged the definition of knowledge as justified true belief, are not only an unresolved puzzle in analytic epistemology but also serve as a model for the common errors that arise in criminal fact-finding. The analysis of the origin and structure of knowledge underlying judicial decisions undertaken on the basis of this model makes it possible to identify the dangers associated with the mechanism of formation of coherent procedural narratives that determine the content and orientation of judicial discourse. The requirement of comprehensiveness, completeness and objectivity of establishing the circumstances of the case, fixed earlier in Art. 20 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the RSFSR (1960), was an important mechanism for preventing such mistakes and its “dismantling” in the current criminal procedure law made modern justice more vulnerable. New information technologies are increasingly penetrating into law enforcement and judicial activities, create opportunities for searching, analysing and presenting information that are many times greater than the human ones. In a certain sense, these are machines for the rapid construction of coherent justifications that are not balanced by the same automatic mechanisms to ensure the correspondence of the obtained results. Therefore, new technologies and their impressive capabilities for searching and processing information amplify the risk of error and, in this respect, constitute a danger.

The paper is dedicated to the relevant topic of applying electronic monitoring measures to individuals who have been placed under house arrest, using the experiences of two countries — France and Iran — as case-studies. The key issue explored in the study is the proportionality criteria of this measure in relation to the suspect’s or accused person’s right to privacy and freedom of movement The authors conclude that French legislation establishes the principle of proportionality between the aforementioned measure and the accused’s freedom of movement, as well as defines clear criteria for proportionality. In contrast, Iranian legislation does not establish the proportionality of this measure with the accused’s freedom of movement, nor does it address the scope and duration of this measure at the legislative level. The authors also point out that French law requires the accused’s consent to wear electronic bracelets in order to respect their dignity and ensure privacy. Iranian law does not clarify the status of the accused’s consent or the consequences of failing to comply with this procedure.

The relevance of the paper stems from anticipated transition of contemporary digital society and the platform economy from Society 4.0 to Society 5.0, characterized by the increasing integration of physical and virtual environments and the expansion of metaverse technologies. This transformation raises fundamental questions regarding revolutionary changes in labor law, including the emergence of digital legal relations, digital subjects of labor law, and qualitatively new phenomena within the institutions of the special part of labor law. The research objective is to pose the problem of digital subjects (quasi-subjects) of labor law and to comprehend the metamorphoses that occur with employees and employers in AI-driven world. During the research, a set of general and special scientific methods was used: dialectics, concrete historical, sociological, comparative legal and system-functional methods, as well as forecasting and logical techniques. Principal results include the substantiation of metamorphosis occurring between the employer and employee in the platform economy and a new concept of digital workers and digital employers as potentially significant subjects of labor law, who will gradually displace classical workers, employees and employers under the transition to Society 5.0 in AI-driven world. The authors substantiate new doctrinal definitions and elements of the legal status of a digital worker and a digital employer. They forecast the development of legal regulation of new digital entities (quasi-subjects) of digital employment relations in Society 5.0.

The article analyzes the controls on the use of cyber weapons in the light of international humanitarian law. This is to show the extent to which the rules of international humanitarian law can be applied to cyber weapons. Cyberspace, in particular, is considered one of the modern fields that man has sought to develop and exploit in a way that achieves interests. Therefore, the concept of cyber weapons, the means and attacks that take place in it, and the scope of international recognition of these weapons will be clarified. The study also shows the appropriateness of the rules of international humanitarian law to be applied to these weapons. In conclusion, the authors formulate a set of results and recommendations. The most important of which is that the use of cyber weapons led to the creation and imposition of the concept of unconventional warfare that enables the conflicting parties, whether States or other parties, to launch attacks on other parties and inflict severe damage on all economic and social aspects. Finally, countries must seek to find new strategies that are compatible with the special nature that distinguishes cyberspace from physical reality and with the security challenges that arise with the continuous development of technology. The international legal rules regulating wars and conflicts must be reviewed in a manner consistent with the continuous technical and technological development. The international criminal justice system must also be activated, and cyber weapons must be included in agreements related to the control of the use of weapons.

The Oceania region, which unites 19 states and territories, has its own environmental problems that require the adoption of appropriate documents to solve them. Using a legal — historical approach, this article revisits the 1976 Apia Convention — the first multilateral environmental treaty concluded by the island states and territories of Oceania — and evaluates its enduring normative and institutional imprint on regional governance. It traces how the Convention’s pioneering obligations to establish protected areas, safeguard endemic and migratory species, and control alien introductions catalysed the creation of the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) that was transformed into an international intergovernmental organization in 1993. It was SPREP that became the basis for instruments such as the 1986 Noumea and 1995 Waigani Conventions. The analysis reveals that, despite entering into force only in 1990 and being formally “suspended” in 2006, the Apia Convention continues to serve as a doctrinal touchstone: national courts and inter-state negotiations still cite its due diligence standard when expanding marine reserves or debating high-seas biodiversity. At the same time, the study identifies structural weaknesses of the convention — a low number of ratifications, voluntary compliance and the absence of enforcement machinery — that limit the Convention’s practical reach, particularly regarding the 21st-century threats such as plastic pollution, deep-sea mining and climate-induced migration. Building on recent political momentum, the authors propose a three-pillar reform package: optional protocols on plastics and seabed extraction; dynamic incorporation of the Paris Agreement and the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) Convention obligations; and a strengthened reporting and a majority vote amendment procedure.

The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) was adopted on 30 April 1982 and opened for signature on 10 December 1982. UNCLOS entered into force on 16 November 1994. In terms of content, UNCLOS 1982 comprehensively regulates international legal issues on seas and oceans, and is the most important international legal basis for countries to establish and exercise sovereignty, sovereign rights, jurisdiction; rights, obligations and other freedoms in the process of exploiting, managing and using seas and oceans for peaceful purposes. Therefore, UNCLOS is considered the “Constitution of the Seas and Oceans” of the international community, the second most important global international treaty after the United Nations Charter, UNCLOS is the legal basis for all actions and cooperation at the national, regional and global levels to “resolve all issues related to the law of the sea” and “establish a legal order at sea.” However, in the face of the constant changes in science and technology, the need to exploit and use marine resources, climate change, international geopolitics, etc., UNCLOS also needs to change to continue to improve and promote its universal international legal value in the present and the future. Based on the above practice, this article will study and clarify three challenges to improve UNCLOS 1982.

The adoption of the World Anti-Doping Code (Code) at the beginning of the twenty-first century was a key step towards the harmonization of anti-doping rules at the international level. While the Code provisions have been regularly updated and improved, the basic legal mechanisms chosen by its drafters, including the principle of strict liability, as well as their practical application, continue to generate debate about the standards of fair and impartial adjudication of anti-doping rule violations and the proportionality of sanctions. In 2024, major doping scandals, which forced the public to discuss the shortcomings of the anti-doping system, have affected the tennis with the doping cases of Jannik Sinner and Iga Swiatek, the first-ranked players in men’s and women’s international professional tennis tours. As a result of a complex study of the Code provisions, it was established that the anti-doping system based on the principle of strict liability contains a combination of procedural and substantive legal mechanisms that lead to the public perception that the system is unfair, allowing unequal treatment of athletes and failing to respect the balance of interests. Based on the findings, the authors propose measures aimed at improving the process of adjudication of anti-doping rule violations.

A state of emergency is one of the most important constitutional tools used by States to confront serious threats to security and public order, such as wars, disasters, or internal unrest. Article 61/Ninth of the Iraq Constitution of 2005 regulates the state of emergency. The Council of Ministers, in agreement with the President of the Republic, is authorized to declare it and present it to the Council of Representatives for approval by a two-thirds majority. However, the problem arises when a caretaker government exists, a government with limited powers according to Iraqi constitutional custom and rulings of the Federal Supreme Court. Its mandate is limited to managing daily and routine affairs, without making fateful or strategic decisions, such as requesting the declaration of a state of emergency. This is a fundamental decision that exceeds its limited authority. Furthermore, a state of emergency is characterized by its exceptional nature, and its declaration requires the presence of a government with full powers, as it affects fundamental rights and freedoms and has serious repercussions for the state’s authorities. Since this government lacks full mandate and is constitutionally prohibited from requesting the declaration of a state of emergency, this research discusses how to deal with crises that occur during the term of this government, and presents some constitutional and legal solutions and legitimizes the decisions, procedures, and material and legal measures taken by this government to confront exceptional circumstances. Therefore, the research aims to balance the necessity of protecting the entity of the State and respecting constitutional principles and guaranteeing rights and freedoms.