?
Условия использования судебных актов для машинного обучения (на примере отдельных решений о защите права собственности
The purpose of this article is to make a thorough analysis of the effectiveness of justice in providing recourse to private property violations in Russia. We also sought to discover whether the judicial protection has been substantially improved, following the promises of the government, and whether the current legal decisions may serve as input data for a machine learning algorithm in the near future. The article presents an analysis of the changes in the Russian procedural law and in the regulation of the national judicial system in the recent years, which form new trends in judicial practice, according to the latest cases for the protection of private property in the courts. The article argues that these trends will negatively affect the automation of justice in the context of the nationwide digitalization of justice, which requires setting guidelines for the automated judicial decisions followed by the automated delivery of judicial documents.
This article’s methodology combines comparative research, foresight, and critical approaches through formal logic, structured analysis, induction, and deduction. Our research produced the following conclusions and findings.
The recent relocation of the Constitutional Court of Russia from Moscow to St. Petersburg did not promote the judicial independence of the Court. On the contrary, the Constitutional Court, through formal excuses, refrains from processing complaints on violation of private property rights and on the inefficiency of judicial procedures.
The recent merger of the Supreme Arbitration Court of Russia and the Supreme Court of Russia has contributed to the uniformity of judicial practice, yet, it violated the rights the owners of the shared premises in apartment buildings, but favored the beneficiaries of the management companies, which breach the owners’ rights.
The article argues that there is a systemic deficiency in protecting private property in Russia, since neither the rules of civil and administrative proceedings, nor the constitutional control tools provide adequate protection on the matter. Judicial acts studied in this article prove their ineffectiveness in contributing to the quality machine learning database for artificial intelligence required for the transition to automatic generation of blueprints and templates of court decisions. They are unsuitable for searching the database for the instances of the application of the law referred to by the plaintiffs, since the courts evade their procedural obligation to explain their rejection of certain laws forming the basis of a lawsuit or a complaint, and turn to other norms instead. These circumstances require the immediate response from the state authorities, including finding efficient ways to provide sustainable development of justice, i.e. ensuring the Rule of Law and access to courts, since otherwise the digitization of justice will lead to the automation of arbitrariness.