Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This article, using the experience of the recent judicial reform of the People’s Republic of China, demonstrates the possibilities for the development of digital justice (as a techno-socio-legal phenomenon) and their limits. Received a legal assessment of actualization, taking into account the current state of affairs of the legal heritage of the Soviet period. The main directions of the development of digital justice have been differentiated and the need to establish the limits for the implementation of this process has been justified. The benefits of traditional justice versus simulated digital justice have been demonstrated. The thesis is justified that the process of digitalization, as an objective phenomenon, does not imply an artificial external setting of the limits of development; at the same time, in relation to specific types of social activities, it is not only permissible, but also advisable to level the directions of implementation of digitalization elements. In this connection, the installation on the formation of non-digital justice is quite reasonable.
Кулаков et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: