Evaluating e-justice in military courts: A critical assessment of digital proceedings, accountability, and appellate efficacy
4 affiliations
- 1Sumy State University
- 2Ordzhonikidzevskyi District Court of Kharkiv City
- 3Odesa State University of Internal Affairs
- 4V. M. Koretsky Institute of State and Law of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
Abstract
This article critically evaluates the implementation of e-justice within military courts, analyzing how digital proceedings impact institutional accountability and appellate efficacy. Utilizing a mixed-methods approach grounded in the Ukrainian military justice system, this research conducts a targeted secondary analysis of an extensive empirical dataset. The methodological framework triangulates a systematic review of 50 legal and policy instruments, survey responses from 90 active military legal professionals, 20 hours of direct court observations, and 20 semi-structured practitioner interviews. While quantitative findings indicate that digital transition reduces proceeding durations by nearly 30%, the qualitative analysis exposes severe systemic vulnerabilities. Specifically, 60% of legal personnel report critical deficits in specialized digital training, which significantly undermines procedural fairness and data security in military appellate processes. A Pearson’s correlation (r = 0.65, p < 0.01) confirms the dependency of operational success on practitioner preparation. The study concludes that digitizing military justice without addressing foundational training and policy gaps jeopardizes both institutional accountability and defendants' rights. Ultimately, we propose actionable policy reforms to reconcile technological modernization with the stringent demands of military criminal justice.
Related
- Beyond Illegality and Admissibility: A Remedial Framework for Evaluating Unlawfully Obtained Evidence in Criminal Proceedings
- Shaping the future doctor: evaluating clinical competence, professionalism, and social accountability among the inaugural medical graduates of the university of global health equity, Rwanda.
- Evaluating Tobacco Use Among United States Air Force Military Trainees: A Narrative Review of the Literature From 1998 to 2020
- Objective Neurocognitive Assessment of Stress and Recovery in Military Personnel: The NPRO-8 MIL Two-Tier Screening Framework
- Does Ecological Momentary Assessment Improve Prediction of Suicide Risk Among Military Personnel and Veterans, and How Frequent Should It Be?
BibTeX
@misc{moisieiev2026evaluating,
title = {{Evaluating e-justice in military courts: A critical assessment of digital proceedings, accountability, and appellate efficacy}},
author = {Mykhailo Moisieiev and Maryna Zaitseva and Dmytro Lisnichenko and Oleksii Shevchuk and Iryna Kozakova},
howpublished = {Zenodo},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.5281/zenodo.23566650},
url = {https://zenodo.org/records/23566650},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Evaluating e-justice in military courts: A critical assessment of digital proceedings, accountability, and appellate efficacy
AU - Mykhailo Moisieiev
AU - Maryna Zaitseva
AU - Dmytro Lisnichenko
AU - Oleksii Shevchuk
AU - Iryna Kozakova
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/22
PB - Zenodo
DO - 10.5281/zenodo.23566650
UR - https://zenodo.org/records/23566650
AB - This article critically evaluates the implementation of e-justice within military courts, analyzing how digital proceedings impact institutional accountability and appellate efficacy. Utilizing a mixed-methods approach grounded in the Ukrainian military justice system, this research conducts a targeted secondary analysis of an extensive empirical dataset. The methodological framework triangulates a systematic review of 50 legal and policy instruments, survey responses from 90 active military legal professionals, 20 hours of direct court observations, and 20 semi-structured practitioner interviews. While quantitative findings indicate that digital transition reduces proceeding durations by nearly 30%, the qualitative analysis exposes severe systemic vulnerabilities. Specifically, 60% of legal personnel report critical deficits in specialized digital training, which significantly undermines procedural fairness and data security in military appellate processes. A Pearson’s correlation (r = 0.65, p < 0.01) confirms the dependency of operational success on practitioner preparation. The study concludes that digitizing military justice without addressing foundational training and policy gaps jeopardizes both institutional accountability and defendants' rights. Ultimately, we propose actionable policy reforms to reconcile technological modernization with the stringent demands of military criminal justice.
ER -