Conceptual principles of ensuring the rights of servicemen in administrative proceedings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relevance of this topic is stipulated by the need to improve judicial mechanisms for the protection of the rights of servicemen, taking into account changes in legislation related to martial law, the need to harmonise national legislation with international standards, and the growing public demand for transparent protection of the rights of servicemen. The purpose of this study was to comprehensively examine the approaches to ensuring the rights of servicemen in the administrative proceedings. The study used a comparative method of analysing the legislative provisions and court practice governing the administrative protection of military personnelʼs rights. A systematic analysis of court decisions in cases involving military personnel is carried out. The author identifies the main obstacles to effective protection of the rights of this category of persons, among which is the lack of special procedural guarantees. Recommendations are made to improve the legal framework to enhance the level of judicial protection of the military. The study also analysed the international experience of such countries as the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Turkey, and Israel. The study showed that in the United States, the rights of the military are protected through specialized military courts, as well as through civilian courts, where the rights of military personnel are protected under human rights laws and federal legislation. In the UK and Canada, case law actively promotes the protection of the military in administrative proceedings. In Turkey and Israel, the existence of military courts allows for prompt resolution of discipline and service issues. At the same time, the protection of the rights of servicemen in these countries is based on national human rights legislation, and only the member states of the Council of Europe that have ratified the European Convention on Human Rights take into account the precedents of the European Court of Human Rights in their case law. The findings of the study confirmed the importance of adapting the best international practices to build an effective system of administrative judicial protection of the rights of servicemen in Ukraine, in particular through the implementation of international standards and the creation of specialized legal institutions for the military
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.048 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.112 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.026 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".