Abstract Judicial institutions across the world face a legitimacy crisis, showing record-low levels of public support. Several studies argue that this increasing distrust in courts stems in part from how judges rule on high-profile corruption cases, but there is no consensus on what shapes public attitudes towards the judiciary. While some studies argue that people care about the substantive outcomes of decisions, others emphasize procedural fairness. To adjudicate between these two perspectives, I drew on an original survey-experiment about a corruption trial in Brazil. Respondents were randomly assigned to read a vignette about a corporate executive convicted of bribery and seeking to overturn his conviction. I manipulated both the procedural irregularities committed by the judge and the outcome of the decision. Results showed that evaluations of courts are shaped primarily by outcomes. When judges overturn convictions of business leaders, they lose support and increase mobilizing attitudes against the court, regardless of the severity of procedural violations. However, some procedural irregularities affected attitudes towards judges. The models showed that judges were viewed as more unethical, unfair, and biased when they advised prosecutors, acted in self-interest, or treated defendants unequally—but not when they overstepped their jurisdiction.

According to the Constitutional Court’s case law, petitions concerning disputes over presidential election results fall into two categories: quantitative petitions, which relate to vote-counting results, and qualitative petitions, which concern alleged procedural violations or irregularities in the conduct of elections.. Although the Constitutional Court more frequently decides cases on quantitative grounds, it has also considered qualitative claims relating to electoral violations that may undermine the legitimacy of the electoral process. This study examines the dynamics of the Constitutional Court’s authority in adjudicating presidential election disputes, as well as the challenges it faces in upholding the principle of electoral justice. The study concludes that constitutional rulings lacking decisiveness, such as those in the 2024 presidential election dispute cases, may weaken public perceptions of electoral legitimacy and further impede the realization of electoral justice. Therefore, the Constitutional Court needs to strengthen clear legal procedures that reflect electoral justice while safeguarding the legitimacy of Indonesia’s democracy

This study analyzes deviations in the Initial Public Offering (IPO) process as the root of stock price manipulation among issuers in Indonesia for the 2020-2025 period. Using a qualitative approach with a multiple case study method, this research examines three issuers sanctioned by the Financial Services Authority (OJK): PT Berkah Beton Sadaya Tbk (BEBS), PT Repower Asia Indonesia Tbk (REAL), and PT Multi Makmur Lemindo Tbk (PIPA). Data were collected through in-depth interviews with 12 informants consisting of former OJK/Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) officials, capital market practitioners, academics, investigative journalists, and legal practitioners, as well as document analysis of prospectuses, financial statements, and OJK documents. The results identify four forms of IPO deviations: manipulation of material fact information, share allotment engineering, due diligence procedure violations, and discrepancies in the use of IPO funds. The BEBS case demonstrates how IPO deviations create structural conditions that facilitate pump-and-dump schemes through 57 nominee accounts, generating manipulative profits of IDR 14.5 trillion. This study identifies five factors causing weak detection and prevention: regulatory factors, law enforcement, corporate governance, market structure, and economic incentives. These findings confirm the OJK's statement that the root of stock price manipulation originates from deviations in the IPO process and emphasize the need for stronger supervision and enforcement.

The article provides a comprehensive theoretical and methodological analysis of the correlation between the concepts of “digital (electronic) evidence” and the “digital (electronic) form of evidence” in criminal procedural proof. It is stated that, in the context of the digitalization of criminal proceedings, doctrine and law enforcement practice continue to lack unity in understanding the procedural nature of evidentiary information recorded in the electronic environment, which leads to the identification of evidence with the technical form of its fixation. It is substantiated that so-called digital (electronic) evidence does not constitute an independent ontological category of evidence, and that factual data recorded in digital form, by their procedural nature, remain testimonies, documents, material evidence, or expert opinions, depending on the manner of their obtaining and consolidation. It is proved that the digital (electronic) form of evidence is a technical and legal method of fixation, preservation, and reproduction of evidentiary information, which correlates with traditional written, oral, and material forms and does not alter the legal essence of evidence. The main features of the digital form are identified, in particular the possibility of multiple copying, dependence on technical means, increased risks of modification, and the specifics of ensuring the authenticity and integrity of data, which necessitate special procedural and forensic safeguards. It is shown that a clear delimitation of the concepts of “evidence” and “form of evidence” is of fundamental importance for resolving issues of admissibility and evaluation of evidence, exercising judicial control, ensuring the rights of the defense, and the correct qualification of procedural violations related to the obtaining and fixation of digital information. It is concluded that precisely the delimitation of the relevant concepts, rather than the declarative introduction of new types of evidence, constitutes a necessary methodological prerequisite for the formation of uniform standards of criminal procedural proof in the context of the digital transformation of criminal justice.

The phenomenon of wrongful conviction in contemporary legal systems underscores the effectiveness of mechanisms for restoring violated human rights and the responsibility of the state for judicial errors. In the context of increasing attention to fair trial standards, the institution of rehabilitation of wrongfully convicted persons acquires particular significance not only as a procedural legal means of overturning unjust judgments, but also as a complex legal and criminological instrument aimed at safeguarding human dignity and restoring social justice. The subject of the research is the institution of rehabilitation of wrongfully convicted persons within the human rights paradigm, with an emphasis on its criminological nature, functional purpose, and role in the system of guarantees for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The purpose of the study is to develop a criminological concept of rehabilitation based on an analysis of its genesis, normative content, and doctrinal approaches, taking into account international human rights standards. The methodological framework of the research is based on general scientific and special legal methods of cognition, including analysis and synthesis, the systemic-structural method, the formal legal method, the comparative legal method, and the criminological method, which ensure a comprehensive understanding of rehabilitation as a multidimensional legal phenomenon. The relevance of the study is determined by the persistence of structural risks of wrongful conviction even in states with well-developed legal institutions, as well as by the insufficient conceptualization of rehabilitation within the criminological dimension. The scientific novelty of the research lies in substantiating rehabilitation as an independent criminological category that integrates restorative, compensatory, and preventive functions. The results of the study demonstrate that wrongful convictions have a complex criminological nature and are caused by a combination of procedural violations, institutional dysfunctions, and evidentiary deficiencies. The expediency of distinguishing between a narrow (procedural) and a broad (socio-legal) interpretation of rehabilitation is substantiated. An original conceptual approach to the grounds for rehabilitation is proposed, defining them as a set of legally significant and socially conditioned circumstances, the establishment of which confirms the unlawfulness or groundlessness of criminal prosecution and gives rise to a positive obligation of the state to ensure the full restoration of the legal and social status of the individual. The practical significance of the findings lies in their potential application to improving criminal procedural legislation, law enforcement practice, and the formation of criminological policy in the field of preventing judicial errors and protecting human rights. It is concluded that the effective functioning of the institution of rehabilitation serves as a criterion of the democratic maturity of a rule-of-law state and as a necessary condition for the humanization of criminal justice.

The subject of the research is the set of legal norms enshrined in part 3 of article 131 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and their application in judicial practice when considering claims made by the prosecutor in defense of public interests. Within the framework of the work, a detailed analysis is conducted of the substantive and procedural aspects of the specified norm, including the duty of the prosecutor to specify the defended interest, indicate the violated right, and the legally prescribed means of its protection. Special attention is paid to investigating doctrinal approaches to understanding the categories of "public interest" and "subjective right," as well as their relation in the context of civil proceedings. The research also covers the law enforcement practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation (2022–2025), within which typical procedural violations committed by prosecutors in exercising their powers are identified and classified, and the legal consequences of non-compliance with the requirements of procedural certainty are analyzed. A comprehensive methodological approach was employed by the authors, including the use of both general scientific methods of cognition (dialectical, methods of analysis and synthesis, systemic-structural) and specialized scientific (legal) methods (formal-legal, comparative-legal, historical-legal, and the method of legal modeling). The article argues that the systemic difficulties in applying part 3 of article 131 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in this category of cases are due to the need for the procedural transformation of public interest into the construct of subjective right. Based on the analysis of extensive judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the authors identify and classify typical procedural violations committed by prosecutors: lack of specification of the violated right, inconsistency of the means of protection with article 12 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, incompleteness of factual circumstances, and defects leading to the unenforceability of judicial acts. The work proposes a set of measures aimed at overcoming the identified contradictions, including the development of judicial interpretation for a broader understanding of "violated right" in publicly significant areas, flexible application of means of protection (in particular, imposing phased obligations), as well as the need to ensure the detailing of claims to guarantee the enforceability of judicial decisions. As a promising direction, the discussion on the feasibility of considering claims for the enforcement of public duties within the framework of administrative rather than civil proceedings is highlighted, which would allow for avoiding the artificial "privatization" of public interest.

Dust explosions pose a significant risk across various industries worldwide, leading to injuries, fatalities, property damage, and environmental consequences. Accurate risk assessment techniques are essential for identifying hazards and implementing preventive measures to mitigate the risk of dust explosions. This research and development study aims to evaluate dust explosion risks using the Risk Assessment Matrix (RAM) to identify and prioritize hazards, and controls were applied using the Hierarchy of Controls which prioritizes risk reduction strategies from elimination to personal protective equipment. Data were collected from a tapioca starch factory in Ubon Ratchathani, Thailand, between June 2023 and March 2024. The RAM assessment indicated a very high risk (level 4) of dust explosions. Key contributing factors included the presence of combustible dust, oxygen, confinement, dust dispersion, and ignition sources. Notably, the primary ignition risks were associated with human error (violations of safety procedures) and mechanical failure (bolts, nuts, and bearing malfunction). Risk mitigation measures were developed and implemented based on the Hierarchy of Controls. Following the intervention, the overall risk was reduced by 52.71%. Elimination and engineering controls were more effective in preventing dust explosions than administrative controls. These findings suggest that integrating RAM with the Hierarchy of Controls provides a practical and reliable approach to reducing explosion risks and enhancing safety in dust prone industrial environments.

This review analyzes current studies on the stability of various blood biochemical parameters, including those used in routine clinical and research pracice, during processing and long-term storage of blood derivative samples in biobanks. The installation of biobanks, as divisions of research and clinical centers that ensure standardization and quality of pre-laboratory research, is becoming a global trend and serves as an effective tool for improving the quality of biomedical research. The following main preanalytical factors affecting the stability of analytes are discussed: delayed centrifugation, storage temperature and duration, and freeze-thaw cycles of biospecimens. A wide variety of indicators, both variable and stable, were described for various violations of the preanalytical stage of laboratory testing. The quantification of one or more preanalytical biomarkers appears to be a reliable and valid method for the assessment of the processing and storage of blood samples and their derivatives. This is of particular relevance when seeking to confirm the quality of samples for specific types of research. The most appropriate approach to assessing the quality of biobank samples, from both economic and technical perspectives, is the use of routine biomarkers determined in clinical diagnostic laboratories. Candidate markers for violations of fundamental preanalytical procedures for working with biosamples and optimal modes of sample preparation and storage have been proposed, which are most likely not to have a critical impact on the stability of most biochemical blood parameters.

Relevance. In criminal proceedings, all evidence must be admissible. We raise the question: should information obtained with errors always lose its procedural validity and be excluded from the overall evidence assessment Purpose: in the light of the results of the analysis of the criminal procedure literature, judicial practice, to substantiate the possibility of filling in individual evidence, which is recognized as inadmissible.Objectives: to analyze the grounds for the recognition of evidence as inadmissible; to reveal the signs of significant and insignificant procedural violations of the law, which are laid in the basis of the recognition of evidence as inadmissible; to analyze the means of filling in evidence previously recognized by the court as inadmissible.Methodology. The methodological basis of the study was formed by means of studying legislative sources, judicial and investigative practice, monographic and periodical literature. Thus, general scientific and specific methods of cognition were applied, such as: analysis, synthesis, generalization, which made it possible to apply a comprehensive approach to the problem of forming the procedural force of evidence and its admissibility.The results suggest that sufficient attention is currently being paid to those procedural errors that may serve as the basis for recognizing evidence as inadmissible. We present methods and variable possibilities for supplementing evidence in order to give it procedural force for evaluation in the overall body of evidence and the adoption of a legal, objective and fair decision on the case.Conclusion: Current legislation does not meet the requirements of modern law enforcement. In particular, in judicial practice, there are facts of recognizing evidence as inadmissible, which is why we conducted an analysis and believe that in situations where the investigation makes mistakes that do not limit the constitutional rights of participants in a criminal case, but based on this fact, it was decided to recognize the information received as inadmissible, they can be corrected and filled in its evidentiary value in the judicial review of the criminal case on the merits.

The article analyzes both scientific doctrines and court decisions in the United States, Germany, and Ukraine, as well as the provisions of current Ukrainian legislation, which play a fundamental role in ensuring the protection of human rights and freedoms in the sphere of administrative liability for acts provided for in Article 130 of the Code of Administrative Offenses. It is noted that in cases involving the prosecution of drivers for driving under the influence of alcohol, it is of fundamental importance to ensure the standard of proof “beyond reasonable doubt,” which requires the court to carefully verify strict compliance with the procedure for examination and admissibility of evidence, since any procedural violation on the part of the police inevitably leads to the arbitrary accusation of any person of being intoxicated and, thereby, constitutes excessive interference in their personal life, violates their right to liberty and freedom of movement, and grossly humiliates their human dignity, which are guaranteed by the Constitution of Ukraine. Based on the results of the study, it was concluded that both legal dogma and judicial practice play a fundamental role in ensuring the protection of human rights and freedoms, creating a reliable basis for harmonizing the national legal order with international standards of justice, and guaranteeing the effectiveness of checks and balances in the current legal reality. The use of scientific doctrines by courts, in particular “reasonable suspicion” and “beyond reasonable doubt,” “the fruits of the poisonous tree”, in cases under Article 130 of the Code of Administrative Offenses helps to move away from a formal approach and require the police to provide indisputable evidence obtained in strict accordance with the established procedure. This guarantees that a driver cannot be held liable on the basis of subjective statements by a police officer alone, without supporting them with proper and admissible evidence. The experience of Germany and the United States contributes to a deeper understanding that the severity of sanctions under Article 130 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (large fines and deprivation of driving rights) actually brings this liability closer to the “criminal aspect” as understood by the ECHR, which requires the highest level of compliance with procedural guarantees. Therefore, it is scientific analysis, taking into account global experience, that allows contradictions to be levelled out and gaps in the national procedure for detecting and recording signs of intoxication to be eliminated, ensuring that drivers have a stronger right to defense, as well as preventing arbitrariness on the part of law enforcement agencies, guaranteeing that no person will be held liable without proper legal grounds. This ensures an appropriate balance between the interests of public safety and the inviolability of the fundamental rights of individuals to a fair trial.

It is indicated that the modern transformation of social relations and the increase in the level of domestic violence require urgent improvement of administrative and legal approaches to ensuring the legal protection of children’s rights. The increase in the number of cases of violence that violates the fundamental rights of children requires the formation of an effective and coordinated administrative and legal mechanism for interaction between numerous subjects of children’s rights protection. The article is devoted to highlighting certain problems of administrative and legal support for the coordination of the activities of subjects of child rights protection in the field of combating domestic violence. The author proves that in the context of aggravation of social problems, ensuring proper legal protection of children’s rights from domestic violence has become an integral part of state policy in the field of childhood protection. It is argued that the central place in the administrative and legal regulation of combating violence is occupied by the issue of effective coordination between numerous subjects of child rights protection, since without their coordinated and synchronous work, timely detection, cessation and prevention of cases of violence are impossible. The main problems that arise in the process of interagency interaction are investigated, which are due to the need to ensure proper coordination and prompt response to cases of violation of children’s rights in the conditions of a complex administrative and legal structure. Special attention is paid to the legal aspects of the delimitation of administrative powers of subjects of protection, the mechanisms of their joint response. An attempt has been made to analyze gaps and conflicts in Ukrainian legislation, in particular in terms of determining administrative liability for violation of coordination procedures. Based on the conducted scientific and legal analysis, the author has formulated a number of proposals for improving administrative and legal regulation in the area under study. Among the key proposals are the creation of a single administrative digital platform for the exchange of information between subjects of protection, a clear definition of administrative protocols of interaction, as well as strengthening the administrative and legal support of the powers of local coordination bodies to ensure effective legal protection of children’s rights.

Procedural violations remain insufficiently studied, with no consistent methodological framework currently in use to support the development of viable branch-specific theories of violations of criminal, civil, and arbitration proceedings or to guide law enforcement practices associated with them. In this article, the general concept of “elements of a violation” is defined. Some of its most controversial aspects are analyzed. The universality of the four-element crime constitution theory is substantiated. The concepts of “violation” and “elements of a violation” are distinguished. The object of a procedural violation is characterized. The results show that the direct object of a procedural violation is represented by procedural legal relations, while the general object of all procedural relations is the procedural legal order, and the specific objects include a variety of forms of justice administration. The conclusion is made that most procedural violations take the form of inactions and are often described using standard and evaluative terms. The study proves that the court does not act as the subject of a procedural violation. The absence of a minimum age threshold for procedural liability is considered as a lacuna in procedural rules that should be remedied.

This study aims to analyze the evidence for the mens rea element of evil in corruption stemming from public policymaking, focusing on the alleged sugar import corruption case involving Tom Lembong. The primary issue in this case is the blurred line between policy discretion and corruption. Using normative juridical research methods and a case study approach, this study examines whether violations of administrative procedures automatically represent criminal mens rea (evil intent). The results show that in policy-based corruption, mens rea cannot be simply equated with administrative errors. Evidence of fraudulent intent, as defined by Article 2 of Law Number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with Law Number 20 of 2001, is required, with the intention to enrich oneself, others, or corporations for illegitimate economic gain or to the detriment of the state. Law enforcement that relies solely on state losses without proving personal motives or kickbacks risks the criminalization of policies, which could stifle bureaucratic innovation in Indonesia.

The subject. The subject of this research is the legal nature of the prejudicial effect of judicial decisions and the rationale for establishing permissible limits of its restriction in the resolution of family law disputes directly affecting the rights and protected interests of minors.The aim of thе article is to characterize the general grounds for limiting the prejudicial force of court acts, as established in the legal practice of the Russian courts, and to subsequently develop a framework of criteria defining the admissible boundaries of such a departure. The ultimate objective is to ensure the effective and prioritized protection of the rights and best interests of minors in family litigation.Methodology. The study is based on a combination of general scientific and specific legal methods. General scientific methods include deduction, analysis, and synthesis. The specific legal methodology comprises the formal-legal (dogmatic) method, the legal interpretation method (construing legal norms), and the comparative legal approach.Main results. Departure from the prejudicial effect of a judicial decision in disputes concerning the rights of minors is not only admissible but also expedient within legally defined limits. The paper substantiates the necessity of striking a balance between two competing legal values: the stability and binding force of judicial acts (prejudice) and ensuring the effective judicial protection of the child's best interests.Conclusions. The legal nature of prejudice may systematically conflict with the principle of priority and effective protection of the rights and interests of minors when resolving family disputes. It is necessary to develop special criteria for the admissibility of derogation from the prejudicial force of judicial decisions. These include: (1) the criterion of materiality is the presence of serious procedural and material violations during the previous decision, which cannot be eliminated by appealing a judicial act; (2) the criterion of dynamism is the emergence of new circumstances or a change in existing ones since the previous decision was made; (3) the criterion of a conflict of interest is motivated conclusions that adequate protection of the minor was not provided in the previous process, as a result of which the formal application of prejudice leads to a clear and significant violation of his rights and interests. These criteria should be applied by the court in aggregate, as part of the implementation of the principle of judicial discretion, aimed at establishing a fair balance between the stability of judicial acts and the protection of the highest constitutional value of childhood.

Civil procedure has traditionally been viewed as a means of resolving disputes between two parties, with the court providing a formal framework for the proceedings, focusing primarily on delivering a judgment and leaving the conduct of procedural activities largely at the parties’ discretion. This article provides insights into the regulation in Latvia, which establishes the obligation of good faith and truthfulness in civil proceedings, and examines Latvia’s experience in identifying procedural abuses in case law at all three judicial levels. As constitutional values have gained importance and the concept of the right to a fair trial has evolved, our understanding of civil procedure is gradually changing; it must serve not only the protection of the parties’ subjective interests but also the common good of society, with the court playing a more active role in ensuring a fair trial. These developments call for a shift in the approach to how parties’ rights are exercised and enforced, as well as for strengthening the court’s role—an evolution highlighted by procedural law reforms in European countries. Considering over 200 publicly available rulings of Latvian courts, the article categorises the most common instances of procedural abuse and violations of the obligation to tell the truth. The final section addresses the court’s role in promoting and ensuring compliance with the duty of good faith.

This article examines the transformation of corruption risks within the public procurement sector amidst the operation of Ukraine’s contemporary digital infrastructure. Particular emphasis is placed on a contradictory contemporary trend: notwithstanding the strategic drive toward absolute transparency and the deployment of advanced digital tools (Prozorro, DREAM, risk-oriented monitoring modules), corruption levels have not diminished but rather evolved into novel, latent forms. Corruption is emerging as a dynamic phenomenon that successfully adapts to digitalization by shifting the center of gravity from overt procedural violations to domains inaccessible to automated control, specifically targeting the stages of planning, direct contracting, and the physical execution of contracts.The methodological framework of the study is constituted by a synthesis of systemic, institutional, and comparative approaches, which facilitated the examination of public procurement as a holistic system susceptible to destructive influences throughout various stages of its implementation. The informational and empirical basis of the research comprises Ukrainian regulatory legal acts, analytical reports from the National Agency on Corruption Prevention, case law from the High Anti-Corruption Court, and studies by Transparency International Ukraine covering the 2024–2025 period.The article provides a detailed analysis of the domestic infrastructure of digital tools (Prozorro, BI Prozorro, DOZORRO, Clarity Project, YouControl, Spending, DREAM). It is argued that while the existing toolkit ensures a high degree of transparency for external monitoring, it does not constitute a sufficient condition for eliminating malpractices occurring outside the electronic system.A key outcome of the work is the development of a systematized classification of corruption risks and their implementation schemes across the stages of the procurement cycle. Specifically, at the planning stage, schemes involving the manipulation of expected value and the artificial division of the procurement subject to evade open tenders were identified, while at the documentation preparation stage, mechanisms for tailoring technical requirements to a specific manufacturer and establishing discriminatory qualification criteria were revealed. In the context of martial law, particular attention is devoted to abuses related to direct contracting through the interpretation of “urgent need” and the involvement of shell companies. Simultaneously, at the contract execution stage, identified as the most critical, schemes involving unjustified price increases via supplementary agreements, the substitution of goods with lower-quality alternatives, and the signing of acceptance certificates for fictitious works were analyzed.Based on the conducted analysis, the necessity of shifting the anti-corruption policy strategy is substantiated: transitioning from exclusively external oversight to the development of an effective internal control system. The implementation of the “Three Lines of Defense” model at the level of procuring entities is recommended, which envisages a clear delineation of functions between risk owners (operational level), control units (compliance), and internal audit. It is concluded that overcoming corruption requires not merely the automation of processes, but profound changes in societal values and the system of economic relations.

The persistence of occupational accidents in high-risk work environments, even in organizations that comply with regulations, training programs, and safety management systems, indicates that unsafe behaviors cannot be explained solely by technical failures or procedural violations. This issue highlights the need to analyze the sociocultural factors that influence risk perception and the adoption of safe behaviors within organizations. This article presents a theoretical and documentary analysis aimed at understanding how elements such as organizational culture, safety education levels, social pressure, informal norms, and the normalization of risk shape workers’ preventive behavior. Using an exploratory methodology grounded in the critical review of recent studies and conceptual frameworks from labor sociology and organizational psychology, the analysis identifies cultural patterns that strengthen or weaken safety culture. The theoretical findings emphasize the importance of preventive leadership, open communication, and the construction of shared meanings as key mechanisms for consolidating sustainable safe behaviors. Furthermore, the study demonstrates that integrating sociocultural perspectives into preventive management enables more human-centered, participatory, and context-sensitive strategies capable of influencing real worker behavior beyond regulatory compliance. This theoretical contribution broadens the understanding of industrial safety by recognizing it as a complex social phenomenon, essential for reducing accident rates and promoting safer and healthier work environments.

Performance integrity of correctional officers in Indonesia has received increasing attention amid growing demands for professionalism and transparency, as well as various reports of procedural violations. This situation underscores the need to examine internal factors influencing integrity, particularly work competence, work discipline, and the role of transformational leadership. This study aims to investigate the relationships between work competence and work discipline on the performance integrity of correctional officers in Indonesia, assess the moderating effect of transformational leadership, and identify which factors most significantly impact integrity within correctional institutions. A quantitative approach was employed through a survey of 351 active correctional officers from various institutions across Indonesia, with data analyzed using PLS-SEM version 4.0.9.9. The findings indicate that work competence has a strong and significant effect on performance integrity, whereas work discipline and transformational leadership do not have significant effects, either directly or as moderators. These results emphasize that enhancing technical and functional competencies is key to improving integrity. This study is limited to quantitative analysis and does not encompass qualitative aspects, such as organizational culture, moral values, or interpersonal dynamics. Practically and theoretically, this research contributes to human resource management in correctional institutions by providing evidence-based insights and serving as a policy reference for implementing competency-focused strategies to strengthen officer integrity. The novelty of this study lies in its emphasis on individual capability as a more influential factor on integrity than structural mechanisms such as discipline or leadership style, challenging the common assumption that administrative discipline or leadership alone can foster integrity.

The article examines the issue of detecting and exposing the unlawful use of operational and investigative information in modern criminal proceedings. It has been established that operational and investigative information is an important tool for ensuring the effectiveness of crime investigation and the formation of the evidentiary base; however, its application requires strict compliance with the principles of legality and procedural norms. It has been determined that violations of statutory procedures for obtaining or using such data lead to the recognition of evidence as inadmissible and create grounds for bringing officials to legal liability. The legislative regulation of operational and investigative activities in Ukraine has been analyzed, including mandatory judicial authorization of covert investigative actions, clear time limits for their implementation, and proper documentation of the results. It has been proven that adherence to these procedures is a prerequisite for ensuring the legitimacy of the evidentiary process, the protection of constitutional human rights, and the observance of the rule of law. The importance of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights has been revealed, which repeatedly emphasizes the inadmissibility of using evidence obtained without procedural authorization or in violation of fundamental individual rights. It has been emphasized that judicial control over operational and investigative measures, as well as procedural guarantees for the defense – in particular, the right to access materials, copies of court decisions, and official records – ensures the timely detection of violations and the exclusion of unlawfully obtained evidence. It has been substantiated that further improvement of the legal framework governing operational and investigative activities, strengthening of legality control, and harmonization of national legislation with international standards are key factors in enhancing the effectiveness of criminal proceedings. It has been proven that ensuring transparency, accountability, and legality in the field of operational and investigative activity contributes to the consolidation of justice, strengthens public trust in law enforcement agencies, and upholds the authority of the judiciary in Ukraine.

In resolving disputes over regional head election results, the Constitutional Court often takes legal steps by postponing the application of the vote margin threshold. In addition, the Court makes judicial reasoning to harmonize various interpretations among election organizers. This study aims to identify the reasons for the deferment of the threshold application and to examine the Constitutional Court's judicial reasoning in handling this dispute. Using normative legal research methods with a conceptual, statutory, and case-based approach, this study concludes that the Constitutional Court has set aside the vote margin threshold in extraordinary cases, particularly in cases involving procedural violations or candidates' ineligibility to advance as participants. This is evident in election disputes from 2016 to 2025. Another conclusion is that the Constitutional Court's use of judicial reasoning aims to resolve legal ambiguity and prevent inconsistencies in the application of election norms among stakeholders. The findings of this study carry significant strategic implications for both election organisers and lawmakers. This study contributes to the understanding of how the Constitutional Court's judicial activism shapes electoral justice and the need for legislative harmonization.