Guidelines for Articles

To publish an article in the scientific edition “Journal of Eastern European Law” it is necessary to submit to the electronic address easternlaw.ua@gmail.com the following materials:

1) electronic version of the article*;

2) original of article review signed by doctor or candidate of juridical sciences who within last three years have not less than one publication in editions included to Web of Science Core Collection and/or Scopus or have monographs or parts of monographs published in international publishing houses included to categories “A”, “B” or “C” under classification Research School for Socio-Economic and Natural Sciences of the Environment (SENSE). Article review should be sent via Nova Poshta to Kharkiv, branch 2, Sokolan Svitlana 0637585724. The form of the article review can be downloaded here;

3) photo of the author.

Example of the signing the file: Petrov_article, Petrov_review, Petrov_receipt, Petrov_photo.

The articles are published in author’s edition. The editorial board of “Journal of Eastern European Law” is not responsible for any spelling, stylistic or other mistakes made by the author.

The journal publishes the articles representing scientific, practical and methodological research which have not been published before and are prepared in Ukrainian, Russian or English and meet the following requirements:

1) statement of the issue in general and its connection with important scientific and practical tasks (“Issue”);

2) analysis of recent research and publications which initiated the solution of the mentioned problem and to which the author refers (“Analysis of Recent Research and Publications”);

3) emphasizing those parts of general problem which the article addresses (“Unsolved problems”);

4) setting the goals of the article (setting the task) (“Purpose”);

5) presenting of main body of the research with reasoning of obtained scientific results (“Main Body”);

6) conclusions from this research and future developments (“Conclusions”)

These elements should be bold in the article.

The article should include the following elements:

- UDC;

- first name, last name and patronymic of the author, his/her scientific degree, academic rank, position;

- name of the article;

- summary in Ukrainian, Russian and English;

- summary in English should contain not less than 1800 characters, summary in Russian and Ukrainian should contain not less than 30 words. In order to check the accuracy of translation we kindly ask you to provide a summary in Ukrainian.

- keywords (5-7);

- the main body;

- the list of references according to the state standards.

The article should be in Microsoft Word. Fields – 20 mm from all sides. Font – Times New Roman 14 with line spacing 1,5. It is necessary to attach an electronic photo of the author in a separate file with a format 4×5,5 with extension  *jpg. quality 600*600 dpi.

fields – 2 cm (bottom) x 2 cm (top), 3 cm (left) x 1,5 cm (right); indention – 1,25 cm; line spacing – 1,5 cm; font – Times New Roman; size – 14.

The citations should be made in the text.

In square brackets it is necessary to mention the number of the reference and after the comma the page.

Articles which do not comply with the mentioned requirements are not accepted for publication.

Example of the article

УДК [351.74:621.397.4] (477)

Петров Петро Павлович –

кандидат юридичних наук, доцент,

 доцент кафедри адміністративного права

Київського національного університету

 імені Тараса Шевченка

ВІДЕОЗАПИС ЯК ДЖЕРЕЛО ДОКАЗІВ: НОТАТКИ ДО НАУКОВОЇ ДИСКУСІЇ

У статті розглянуто положення процесуального законодавства щодо поводження з таким доказом, як відеозапис, зроблено висновок про неможливість віднесення відеозапису до речових доказів і документів, а також запропоновано надати відеозапису статусу окремого джерела доказів.

Ключові слова: доказ, джерела доказів, відеозапис, судове провадження, позасудове провадження, процесуальне законодавство.

В статье рассмотрены положения процессуального законодательства каса- тельно обращения с таким доказательством, как видеозапись, сделан вывод о невозможности отнесения видеозаписи к вещественным доказательствам и документам, а также предложено предоставить видеозаписи статус отдельного источника доказательства.

Ключевые слова: доказательство, источник доказательств, видеозапись, судебное производство, внесудебное производство, процессуальное законодательство.

Petrov P.P. Videotape as a Source of Evidence: Notes to a Scholarly Dispute

The article deals with provisions of procedural legislation on giving definition to evidence and a videotape as one of its types. A videotape can refer both to physical evidence and documents pursuant to the provisions of procedural codes. But the author disagrees with these provisions. He mentions that procedural code identifies the document as a material object which is specially created to keep information and can be used as a proof of facts or circumstances during criminal proceeding. But the legislator provided such definition of the document without analyzing a semantic meaning of this word. A document is interpreted in the definition dictionary as 1) an official paper that proves some legal fact, certificates something, serves as an evidence of something. It is everything what confirms something. Commercial paper. 2) a certificate which tests the person; 3) a written essay, commendation etc. which proves something important or historical; 4) a paper which is created to be filled in. In this regard the author draws a conclusion that a document is a paper and a videotape can not be addressed as a paper. Physical evidence is items of the physical world which contain information on circumstances important for the case. Some procedural codes say that physical evidence includes magnetic, electronic and other data storage devices which contain audiovisual information on circumstances having the meaning for the case. In such a way a videotape can be the type of physical evidence. But a videotape does not correspond to the definition of a physical videotape which is contained in procedural codes. Magnetic, electronic and other data storage devices are items containing information which can be helpful to establish important circumstances. This information can be obtained from the content of these items through special equipment. This process differs from the process of examining physical or written evidence when their material from is examined. In this regard the author makes a conclusion that the legislator referring a videotape to physical evidence or documents does not want to take into account transformations in the world including progress in science and technology. In turn it tries to explain new facts with old definitions. The author does not accept this position and proposes to provide a videotape with the status of an independent type of evidence. The author proves that this step will assist judges to have a more serious attitude to this type of evidence and take it into account during the trial. In this regard the author offers to amend procedural legislation in force with a provision that factual circumstances can be established by audio- and videotapes and allocate in separate section procedure for handling with this evidence. The author analyzes procedure of using videotape in a non-judicial process. She considers provisions of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offences and makes a conclusion that this law does not regulate handling with videotapes during procedures on administrative offences which are conducted by the representatives of public administration agencies. Thus propositions on amending procedural judicial legislation can be used in a non-judicial process. The author also proposes to amend the draft law on Administrative Procedural Code of Ukraine with provisions concerning videotape.

Keywords: evidence, source of evidence, videotape, judicial procedure, non-judicial procedure, procedural legislation.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • RSS