Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The paper draws attention to the priority of the judicial form of protection of rights and interests of physical and legal entities, state and public interests, as well as gradual pervasion of the justice system with IT-technologies that ensure openness of the proceedings, save time and money of the participants, reduce time needed to file and process pleadings, etc. On the basis of the analysis of the proposed doctrinal approaches and legislative acts to the definition of the meaning of e-justice, the author presents her understanding of e-justice that covers three aspects. Such an approach may be of practical importance depending on how well e-justice has been developed in Russia. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of the extended approach to the definition of e-justice, including the use of AI systems. The paper investigates advantages and possible risks associated with the introduction of the systems applied to assist a judge in making final court decisions (“companion judge”) and systems that replace a judge in making the final court decisions (“digital judge”). As a result, it is concluded that the most acceptable system for the Russian system of justice is the “Companion Judge” AI system. In the author’s opinion, complete replacement of judges by “digital judges” is ethically and legally ambiguous, poses many risks and will not provide effective protection for the violated or contested rights, freedoms and interests of citizens, organizations, State and public interests.
L. V. Borisova (Sat,) studied this question.