The article is devoted to the study of understanding the nature, status, structure and, mainly, the functional significance of the history of criminal law as a specific field of scholar theoretical-legal knowledge. In this context its axiological, methodological, ontological, epistemological, and ethical essence are mentioned, each one is accompanied by author’s argumentation and explanations of the arguments put forward. Within the framework of this problem, the main stages of development, the essence of numerous academic views, ideas, approaches of representatives of various areas of legal science, underlying the discussion on this, were not left without attention. By means of numerous techniques and methods of cognition, including analysis, synthesis, formal logical, comparative, functional and systemic methods, the author presents the characteristics of the elements of scholar knowledge of the history of criminal law. It, taking into account the research issues being solved in the cognition of individual branch components of the legal heritage of the past, includes: a) history of military criminal law; b) history of canonical criminal law; c) history of (customary) folk criminal law and of international criminal law; d) comparative history of criminal law; d) history of legal technique in the field of criminal legislation; e) history of the science of criminal law. In process of studying theoretical and methodological nuances of the history of criminal law and formation of an idea of it, author came to the conclusion that, due to the features mentioned above, it is an integral component of historical jurisprudence, that in turn is a sub-branch of historical and legal science, and not the science of criminal law, while possessing its distinctive subject uniqueness and specific features. It is explained by its inseparable connection with historical processes of development of human society, both legal and cultural, socio-economic, ethnic and other properties, but also necessarily by the nature of the source study base used in this regard, as well as the methodology of its cognition, which to a greater extent certainly has a historical and legal basis.

of religious minorities and contrasts these legal provisions with the legal provisions of minority groups in the modern Muslim-majority states. Muslim jurists in historical times had created an extensive legal code that classified non-Muslims into legal categories including ahl al-dhimma (protected people), and granted them certain rights and duties as members of an Islamic polity. Such classical models were contextually anchored in the pre-modern political structures and social norms which are not similar to the modern system of the nation-state. As the concept of colonialism, nationalism and constitutionalism entered the Muslim world, the legislative attitudes towards religious minorities were changing, and the law in such countries as Egypt, Pakistan, Indonesia and Morocco started to become characterized by hybridized norms, i.e.- being based on the principles of Islamic law and international human rights law, as well as being being shaped by the needs of local politics. This study by examining classical texts through the prism of doctrinal analysis of the major Sunni and Shia schools (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, Hanbali and Ja'fari) and comparing the contemporary legal systems with the historical jurisprudence will outline the areas of similarity and difference between the traditional jurisprudence and modern legal frameworks. The paper finds that despite the fact that foundational Islamic legal principles are still present in the statutory protection, there are specific voids between customary norms and the modern international equality and non-discrimination standards. The study has found that there are a lot of differences among states regarding legal recognition and representation of religious minorities, as well as, their socio-legal status. The policy proposals include reform of the law, inclusive constitutionalism, enhanced anti-discrimination statutes, and the alignment of traditional formations with contemporary human rights demands.

Purpose – This article examines marriage registration in Islamic family law by positioning it as a legal-political arena, rather than merely an administrative requirement. Employing a qualitative socio-legal approach, this study investigates how the modern state constructs compulsory marriage registration as a mechanism for integrating Islamic norms, public interest, and legal pluralism. The analysis combines normative Islamic legal inquiry, historical examination of regulatory developments, and legal-political theories—particularly John Hart Ely’s representation-reinforcing theory, Savigny’s historical jurisprudence, and Mahfud MD’s contextual legal-political framework. Methods– This study employs a socio-legal method to examine marriage registration as a legal, social, and political construct within the framework of Islamic family law. Findings – The findings demonstrate that marriage registration signifies the transformation of Islamic family law from a community-based legal order into a state-centered legal system oriented toward rights protection, legal certainty, and social justice. From the perspective of maṣlaḥah mursalah and maqāṣid al-sharī‘ah, marriage registration functions as a legal mechanism to safeguard vulnerable groups, especially women and children, while simultaneously serving as a state instrument for shaping a legally recognized and administratively ordered family structure. Research implications – The main contribution of this article lies in proposing an analytical framework that conceptualizes marriage registration as a site of legal-political negotiation between the state, religion and society. By foregrounding power relations, legal policy, and normative integration, this study advances contemporary scholarship on Islamic family law and highlights the political dimensions of the regulation of family institutions in Muslim societies.

This review offers a comprehensive analysis of Dār al-Islām Revisited: Territoriality in Contemporary Islamic Legal Discourse on Muslims in the West by Sarah Albrecht, a study that explores the evolving interpretations of classical Islamic territorial concepts such as dār al-Islām and dār al-ḥarb in the context of postcolonial Muslim migration to the West. Based on her doctoral dissertation, Albrecht’s work bridges historical jurisprudence and contemporary discourse to examine how these concepts have been reappropriated by Muslim scholars, activists, and institutions to address issues of identity, authority, and legal belonging in a globalized world. The book is structured around a typology of four interpretive trends, ranging from strict traditionalists to reformist voices who seek to transcend geo-religious boundaries altogether. Through detailed historical analysis and contemporary case studies, Albrecht demonstrates how territoriality has shifted from a rigid legal category to a flexible and contested discursive tool. The review highlights the book’s central argument that the reconceptualization of territorial distinctions is not merely a doctrinal exercise but a vital response to the lived realities of Muslims in the West. It also underscores the implications of these debates for the discipline of fiqh, especially in light of the democratization of Islamic knowledge and the decentralization of legal authority beyond the traditional scholarly elite.

Education, often regarded as an invaluable and imperishable treasure, is a repository of humanity’s collective knowledge and wisdom. This idea is particularly evident in the history of jurisprudence, where present-day institutions are not products of sudden creation but rather the result of generations of accumulated experience and gradual evolution. Each generation inherits a legacy of ideas, traditions, and habits from its predecessors, which serve as the foundation for new developments. This continuity ensures that while the “old order” gives way to the “new,” it leaves a substantial nucleus of knowledge and practices, enriching and guiding future generations. In the realm of law, this process manifests as a compromise between the past and the present, where historical traditions blend with contemporary needs to shape legal doctrines. The dynamic evolution of legal systems demonstrates that laws are not static but are deeply rooted in the socio-cultural contexts of their time. Consequently, interpreting legal principles requires more than logical or abstract analysis; it necessitates a nuanced understanding of their historical and cultural origins. This interplay of continuity and change highlights the enduring relevance of education and history in shaping human institutions. It underscores the importance of contextual insight in interpreting and applying legal doctrines effectively. So far as legal education is concerned, it is perhaps the foremost requirement for the efficient working of any legal system and maintenance of legal order in the society. The legal education, if we see it from an Indian point of view, has its origins in the dissemination of the concept of dharma in ancient society. In the Vedic age, it was essentially the study and analysis of the rights and wrongs and the pursuit of the highest justice that pervaded organized learning into the Dharma philosophy.

This article proposes a legal analysis of the legislative provisions as well as the canonical, statutory norms and special regulatory provisions adopted in the sphere of French legislation at the beginning of the XXth century, especially in the context of the adoption of the Law of Separation of the Churches and the State in 1905 (1905), but also considering the normative changes disposed of by other laws and orders adopted in 1998, 2015, 2019, and 2021. Methods and methodology: The article uses the research method of historical jurisprudence and also the legal analysis aimed to reflect the legal regime of the religious organizations and associations bringing a complex overview of the policy parameters of public establishments, the practice of religion and the legal status of the moveable and immoveable property. Results and discussion: The results of the analysis individualize three particular dimensions of the new legislative framework, namely (1) the importance given to the property administration, (2) the regulatory norms of the relationship between state and church, as well as (3) the general regime of cults and the administration of the public property, here including state and other administrative bodies: departments, municipalities and ecclesiastic establishments. Conclusions: The present study highlights a multidisciplinary approach to ecclesiastical jurisdiction focusing both on the determined role of institutional policies and also on the role of the historical and legislative factors in the relationship between state, society and church.

The publication of a monograph by Dr Luca Siliquini-Cinelli on the history of scientia iuris in which he argues that law is a constructed form of knowledge that differs from experience is not just an important and very learned contribution to historical jurisprudence. The book’s thesis is also making an important contribution to the debate about the impact, and probable future impact, of artificial intelligence (AI) on law, legal thought and legal reasoning. In critically reviewing the book, this essay will briefly indicate how and why Dr Siliquini-Cinelli’s book is establishing a fundamental relationship between historical jurisprudence (understood as the history of legal thought) and AI. Keywords: artificial intelligence (AI); epistemology; legal singularity; map; model; philosophy; rule-theorist; territory.

Our purpose in this paper is to show the interrelation between Islamic jurisprudence as a science that contains high values and ethics. The impetus of this research is the two causes, the first is the absence of this relation in most of the Islamic literature, especially in the history of jurisprudence, and the second is the direct elimination of the Islamic thought in the ethical scope by the Western researchers in their contemporary studies. The author of this paper based on the heritage of al-Ghazali (d. 505 AH- 1111 CE), especially in his masterpiece ‘Iha’y ‘ūlūm ḍḍin.

Introduction. The hero of our Essay, Mykola Mykolajovich Pavlov-Silvansky, hails from an ancient Ukrainian family renowned for producing many distinguished figures. The genealogy of this family alone warrants separate study. However, the most captivating aspect is the life of Mykola Mykolajovich himself, who played an active role in the social and scientific narratives, contributing significantly to the advancement of Ukrainian academic legal studies and the cultural and educational development in the Poltava region. He left his mark on state control theory and local history research and eventually fell victim to unjust repression. A thorough examination of M. M. Pavlov-Silvansky’s life and work promises to add new dimensions to the early development of legal research at the All-Ukrainian Academy of Sciences and to begin the process of restoring justice concerning the jurist and his scholarly contributions. The aim of the article. This article seeks to reconstruct the researcher’s biography scientifically, as well as to clarify and assess his scientific legacy. Results. Utilizing archival and other sources, we have reconstructed the scientific biography of the researcher. This includes compiling genealogical data on his closest relatives, characterizing his pre-revolutionary work, detailing his contributions to the development of academic legal studies, and his influence on the cultural and educational spheres in Lubny, Poltava region. The study also covers his life and activities after leaving Ukraine and the circumstances surrounding the unlawfully initiated criminal case against him. Conclusion. While M. M. Pavlov-Silvansky may not be ranked among the most illustrious legal scholars, he was unquestionably a talented scientist, a pioneer who personally laid the organizational and methodological foundations for further research of customary law in Ukraine. He offered valuable insights on several aspects of enhancing domestic state and legal institutions and made significant contributions to the cultural and educational prosperity of his hometown, Lubny. Nonetheless, there are notable gaps in his biography, especially concerning the final years of his life and the circumstances of his death, which future generations of researchers will need to elucidate. Key words: Ukraine, All-Ukrainian Academy of Sciences, the Commission of Customary (folk) Law, History of Jurisprudence, Customary Law, Pavlov-Silvansky M. M., scientific biography, unlawful repression.

The subject of study is some significant historical stages of the formation and development of the institution of criminal procedure deadlines. The aim is to identify the national tradition of regulating deadlines and mechanisms for speeding up criminal procedures. The object of the study was the criminal procedure norms of different periods of time of the development of legislation in Russia, domestic judicial practice and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights in the context of resolving the issue of the need for the existence of a requirement for the reasonableness of the terms of criminal proceedings in the system of traditional Russian principles. The research is based on general scientific and private scientific methods of cognition, which made it possible to analyze sources on the chosen topic and synthesize knowledge about the evolution of the terms of criminal proceedings. The method of comparative historical jurisprudence allowed us to formulate a conclusion about the adherence to the legislative tradition of separating principles-ideas and specific rules for the preliminary investigation and judicial review of criminal cases. It is concluded that the requirement of the reasonableness of the timing of criminal proceedings in the historical context was completely justified and addressed to the preliminary investigation authorities, as a rule, on immediate procedural activity. Changing the status of this rule to a principle did not significantly change law enforcement activities, but introduced an imbalance in the systematic approach to regulating criminal procedural relations. The measures to speed up the judicial review mentioned in the provisions of Article 6.1 of the CPC of the Russian Federation and the corresponding resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation are of a mixed nature. The directives of the President of the Court regarding measures to speed up the proceedings contradict the independence of judges and violate the principle of legality. In this regard, a proposal was made to exclude this requirement from the system of principles, followed by the addition of the general conditions of preliminary investigation and judicial proceedings.

The article presents results of studies of the historical choice factor in the process of establishment of the Russian legal system from the standpoint of influence of European and Asian legal traditions on evolution of Russian law. The author brings forward some methodological approaches to solution of research tasks solved in this sphere of historical jurisprudence.

Conservation of natural resources and rational use of natural resources is a priority within the framework of the National Security Strategy. In recent years, there has been an alarming trend towards an increase in poaching, especially in regions with a low level of economy and particularly rich natural resources. This article provides a historical sketch of the development of legal norms governing hunting issues and an analysis of modern legislation in the field of hunting. The review of judicial practice of bringing persons to responsibility for illegal hunting is given. A number of preventive methods to combat this crime are also being introduced. Thus, the problem of preventing illegal hunting is complex and requires an integrated approach when studying it. The subject of this work is the analysis and coverage of the history of the emergence and development of hunting legislation. Namely, its applied significance, which became the basis for the design of legal relations in this area. The research is based on general scientific and private scientific methods of cognition, which made it possible to analyze and synthesize knowledge about the evolution of hunting legislation. The method of comparative historical jurisprudence made it possible to determine the nature of legal relations in various periods, starting from Ancient Russia. Previously, the legislation regulating relations regarding hunting resources was of an economic nature and regulated contractual relations in order to obtain benefits. Currently, a large block of legislation is devoted to the rules for the use of hunting resources in order to preserve them, increase them and preserve their role in maintaining the stability of ecosystems. During the analysis, a number of modern acts were examined, which allowed us to draw the following conclusions: today it is advisable to update strategies to combat illegal hunting. It requires significant financial, human and time resources. In addition to the revision of hunting legislation, it is necessary to use new technologies for monitoring and protecting wildlife, as well as active cooperation between various levels and areas of public authority. And also to convey the importance of protecting natural resources, including the protection of wildlife, to the legal consciousness of citizens.

The article illustrates the different meanings of the term “logic” in Weber's work and then proceeds to discuss his approach to the explanation of historical events and in particular to counterfactual analysis. Weber's epistemology is first situated within the neo-Kantian debates of his time as well as legal positivism and historical jurisprudence. The article then focuses on this author's conception of science as a value sphere, on the aims and methods of explanation in the social and historical sciences and on the key concepts of possibility judgements and adequate causation. The central role played by counterfactuals and modal logic is illustrated through the example of the battle of Marathon, which Weber himself saw as the starting point of a causal chain leading to the rise of Western rationalism. The article concludes by highlighting the pioneering role of Weber's counterfactualism for the subsequent development of possible worlds theory and its use in the causal analysis of singular historical events.

In the history of Shia jurisprudence, the Akhbari school and its ideology emerged before the Usuli school and the Sheikhism school. Throughout the history of jurisprudence, it experienced ups and downs as a result of its confrontation with the Mujtahids and Usulis. When the Sheikhism school emerged alongside the dominance and superiority of the Usuli school over the Akhbari school, the Usulis had the same confrontational stance with the scholars of Sheikhism, particularly due to the specific theological views of Sheikh Ahmad Ahsa'i in certain Shiite doctrinal principles. The method of jurisprudence in the Sheikhism and Akhbari schools is similar in many respects but also differs in some aspects. Sheikhism shares some similarities with the Usuli school but also has significant differences, and it should, in fact, be regarded as an intermediary school between the Usuli and Akhbari schools. This classification is due to a crucial element called "the wisdom of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them)," which has both philosophical and theological dimensions. This concept plays a significant role in the Sheikhism school’s jurisprudential principles and serves as the main distinction between the Sheikhism school and both the Akhbari and Usuli schools. This research follows a descriptive-analytical method, with the main focus on the views of scholars from the Karim Khaniyyah Kerman branch, which is considered the most important and famous branch of Sheikhism.

Even though county governments possess the primary authority to regulate alcohol trade within their jurisdictions and enact new regulations, the challenge of illicit brews continues to persist in Kenya. This study aimed to evaluate the role of enforcement practices on curbing illicit brews in Imenti south sub county. The outcomes of this study will provide valuable insights for policymakers and pertinent government agencies, aiding them in formulating informed policies to address this particular issue within the legal framework. The study adopted Historical Jurisprudence Theory. Adopting descriptive research design and utilizing mixed research approach, the study targeted 349 alcohol traders in Imenti South Sub County. The sample size of alcohol traders was established by utilizing 20% as a representative proportion of the target population, resulting in a sample size of 70 participants. Data collection involved the utilization of questionnaires and interview guides. A pilot study was conducted in two shopping centers, which were subsequently excluded from the main study. Quantitative data was subjected to descriptive statistical analysis and presented in the form of percentages, frequency tables, bar graphs, and pie charts. Qualitative data underwent content analysis for interpretation. The study assessed the impact of enforcement practices factors on curbing illicit brews in Imenti South Sub County. Enforcement practices showed moderate effectiveness, with police arrests being relatively effective, but significant challenges such as compliance and corruption persist. The study recommends strengthening compliance monitoring, combating corruption, increasing resources for enforcement, and enhancing public participation.

The topic of the article concerns the evolution of jurisprudence in the definitions of the language of sociocultural of its historical time. Among the factors of changes in legal analytics and the style of argumentation, the key place is occupied by the category-concept of concept. Concepts express basic ideas concerning the mental and cognitive foundations of the development of law and the science of law. As part of the approaches to the study of law and the science of law, a special place is occupied by cultural and historical jurisprudence, analytical the toolkit of which is designed to identify, describe, and explain conceptual and institutional shifts and transitions in the development of legal systems. Each historical epoch of the evolution of law and the science of law exists and defines itself within the framework of its legal and psychological picture of the world, its basic concepts, and the normative grammar of proper or improper law and order. The language of socioculture, constituting simultaneously the plan of expression of the conceptual picture of the world and the plan of content of its actual meanings and meanings, not only reflects the legal reality, but also shapes it. Each historical epoch speaks the language of its socio-culture, which is analytically and practically reflected both in the composition and definitions of legal science and in the legal constructions of the existing legal order.

This piece is a response to Geoffrey Samuel’s review article that deals with my 2021 monograph, Legal Doctrinal Scholarship. I aim to correct misrepresentations of my position, but I also seek possibilities of a more constructive engagement between Samuel’s diachronic analysis of the development of legal thought and my synchronic account of the character of legal scholarship. The first substantive section aims to set the record straight by explaining my account of legal doctrinal scholarship (as a normative and hermeneutic discipline) against the background of my thoroughly interpretive methodology. Then, I move on to addressing some of Samuel’s specific objections to my account—related to the idea of the rational reconstruction of the law, the scope of interdisciplinary engagement in academic research into law, and the ideological profile of legal doctrinal scholarship. Finally, I address why Samuel’s own account does not fit into the parameters of my own theoretical project. My methodology leaves room for a range of different approaches to legal scholarship—including Samuel’s historical jurisprudence. However, Samuel’s approach lacks the argumentative force he would need to exclude the possibility of providing legal doctrinal scholarship with a plausible epistemological justification within the methodological parameters of my account. I argue that, ultimately, our debate is about the implications of methodological pluralism: the conditions under which theoretical accounts with very different methodological assumptions may have a correcting influence on one another.
 Keywords: Samuel (Geoffrey); interpretivism; science; scholarship; normativity; rational reconstruction; interdisciplinary engagement; ideology; methodological pluralism.

The review of the materials of the Scientific and Practical Forum with international participation “Actual problems of comparative historical jurisprudence and theoretical and legal research”, held in March 2023 at the Faculty of Law of the Higher School of Economics. Within the framework of the Forum, the “Round Table” “The scientific heritage of N.A. Krasheninnikova: to the 95th anniversary of the Professor” was held.

This article examines the most consequential Constitutional case in American history regarding the right of the press to expose the origins of a war – while it was still being fought. The crisis of the early summer of 1971 was unprecedented. In the past, for the sake of national security, limitations had sometimes been imposed on newspapers and magazines condemning the war that was being fought – most notoriously, in the twentieth century, during the First World War. But the case of the Pentagon Papers was peculiar, because the New York Times, and soon the Washington Post, and then about two dozen other daily newspapers reprinted top secret documents that the press was not authorized to possess. The Supreme Court therefore had to resolve the conflict between the claims of the press under the seemingly unambiguous First Amendment (“Congress shall make no law . . .”) and the warning of the executive branch that the lives of American servicemen in Indochina were at stake because of the most enormous leak of secret government documents ever. The Pentagon Papers represent a revealing episode in the history of journalism, the history of governance and the history of jurisprudence.

The review is concerned with two books by Alison Chapman, professor of English at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (USA). In her first book, Chapman offers a new interpretation of J. Milton’s Paradise Lost in the context of 17th-c. English legal discourse. Chapman demonstrates that precise understanding of early European law is necessary to perceive one of the poem’s key problems— that of theodicy, summarised by Milton in the very first lines as one of his major tasks— to vindicate God’s ways in the eyes of people. The monograph mentions such characteristics of historical jurisprudence as its isolation from other disciplines, the so-called legal history ghetto. It is particularly true for interaction between legal practices and religion — the two fields that exchanged nourishing energies during Milton’s day; something barely imaginable today. Chapman’s second book focuses on Milton’s political treatises, showing how Milton achieves his goals through references to Roman, common or ecclesiastical law.