STATE MANAGEMENT IN THE AREA OF ENSURING THE SECURITY OF THE COURT AND PARTICIPANTS IN LEGAL PROCEDURES
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors investigated the features of the legal regulation of the functioning and organizational aspects of the activities of the authorities, the competence of which includes ensuring the security of the court, judges, and other participants of legal proceedings.Particular attention is paid to the intergovernmental body of the Council of Europe - The European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ), one of the activities of which is to ensure the proper functioning of the judiciary. The features of the general project between the CDCJ and Ukraine “Support for judicial reform in Ukraine (voluntary contribution)” are identified. The features of the activities of sheriffs in Canada and the USA, the regulatory documents of these countries, which determine the status and competence of the sheriffs in the field of judicial protection, are highlighted. The chronology of the establishment in Ukraine of the state system for protecting the court, judges, and other participants of legal proceedings, from 1997 to the present, is investigated. In the course of the study, the authors have been determined the individual stages of the establishment in Ukraine of the state system for protecting the court, judges, and other participants of legal proceedings; the competence of state bodies to ensure judicial protection and the legal basis for their activities, depending on the period of operation. The content of the norms of some regulatory legal acts of Ukrainian legislation, which regulates the activities of the bodies responsible for ensuring the security of the court, judges, and other participants of legal proceedings, is disclosed. The scheme of “gap” while elemental situational analysis of safety of participants in legal proceedings is examined. A matrix for ranking the factors of complex security of participants of judicial system and recommendations on development of public management in the area of legal and judicial security.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it