Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The task of constantly improving the efficiency of justice continues to be relevant due to its versatility and the growing demand of society. In order to continue this discussion, the article analyzes the judicial system of Singapore through the prism of its judicial system and judicial proceedings. The purpose of the work is to analyze the practical solutions of the studied justice, to highlight the positive and negative experience. The scientific and practical significance of the study lies in the fact that there is a positive practice of increasing the level of accessibility and openness of justice. As a result, it seems possible to implement the norms of foreign law due to the proximity of the emerging needs of judicial systems, both in Russia and in Kazakhstan. Methodological basis: formal legal method, synchronous and diachronic methods, as well as general scientific methods of cognition. A brief overview of the Singapore justice system, including the experience of implementing electronic technologies in this system, is given. The author shows that the introduction of these technologies and reasonable deterimental some elements of the trial allows to reduce the bureaucratic and material costs, as well as more efficiently and safely in a pandemic 2020 use human resources of the court and other persons involved in the case. Keywords: electronic court, automation of legal proceedings, accessibility of justice, internet. References: [1] Alenov M.A., Implementation of e-justice in Kazakhstan: regulatory framework and prospects // KAZGUU University. – Astana: Law and State, 2013. No. 3 (60). S. 71-73. [2] Cornie Ng. Integrated Electronic Litigation System (iELS) for the Singapore Ludiciary. URL: http: // mstreamlegal.com/ uploads / upload_ legal_ research_ center / lntegrated% 20Litigation% 20system.pdf. [3] Zhuikov V., Borisova E., Golovko L., Bonner A., Yarkov V., Afanasyev S., Pashin S., Patsatsiya M., Tai Yu., Smolnikov D. Reform of the judicial system in Russia: a new stage // Zakon. – M .: Zakon, 2016, No. 11 S. 20-34. [4] Zorkin V.D. The letter and spirit of the Constitution // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. – M .: Rossiyskaya Gazeta, 2018. No. 7689 (226) // SPS ConsultantPlus. [5] In the Supreme Court of the Republic of Singapore Registrar’s Circular No. 3 of 2020 (Mar. 27, 2020) (Supreme Court Circular), https://perma.cc/K5CE-9YW4. [6] Legislation, CRT, https://perma.cc/2XMY-P6D8. [7] Malik, Walled Haider. Judiciary-Led Reforms in Singapore: framework, strategies and lessons. The World Bank, 2007. P. 53. [8] Media Release, Supreme Court, State Courts and Family Justice Courts to Hear Only Essential and Urgent Matters from 7 April to 4 May 2020 (Apr. 5, 2020), https://perma.cc/8WE5-RVQ4. [9] Message from Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, The Singapore Judiciary’s Response to COVID-19 (Mar. 26, 2020), https:// perma.cc/WA7T-DBHN. [10] Momotov V.V. Justice and expediency in the Anglo-American and continental-European legal systems: problem statement // Russian justice. 2017.No. 12.P. 16-24. [11] Lim Seng Siew. The Role of Service Bureaux in EFS. URL: http: // www.lawgazette.com.sg/ 2000-2 / Feb00-20.htm. [12] Reshetnyak V.I. Information technologies in the judicial system of Singapore // Information law. 2012. N 2.P. 21 – 24 // SPS ConsultantPlus. [13] Rogov I. I. Reforming according to the principle of the rule of law // Legal newspaper. 2016. No. 130. [14] Singapore Judicial System, Supreme Court of Singapore (last updated June 7, 2019), https://perma.cc/Z2SX- UFCL. [15] Tan Siong Thye. Senior District Judge Subordinate Courts of Singapore. Current reforms in Asean countries – lessons and experiences. The Singapore’s experience. URL: http: // www.aseanlawassociation.org/ 10GAdocs /. URL: http:// app.supremecourt.gov.sg. [16] Walker J., Watson G.D. New Technologies and the Civil Litigation Process. Common Law General Report. Osgoode Hall Law School York University, Toronto (Canada) http: // research.osgoode.yorku.ca/ iapl2007. [17] Wong Peck. eJustice-Transforming The Justice System. URL: http:// www.aija.org.au/ Law&Tech%2008/ Papers/. [18] Woolf H.K. Access to justice – Final Report to the Lord Chancellor on the civil justice system in England and Wales. London, 1996 https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1632182.Access_to_Justice.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».