Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Prophetic Law Review Journal of Contemporary Business Law & Technology: Cyber Law, Blockchain, and Legal Innovations
Djumaevich, Khaydarov Shukhratjon
Unknown Affiliation
Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Library & Information Science Social Sciences

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
ISSUES OF QUALIFICATION OF THE CRIME OF MURDER OR THREATENING OF VIOLENCE AND DIFFERENTIATION FROM SIMILAR CRIMES Djumaevich, Khaydarov Shukhratjon
Journal of Contemporary Business Law & Technology: Cyber Law, Blockchain, and Legal Innovations Vol. 1 No. 9 (2024): Journal of Contemporary Business Law & Technology: Cyber Law, Blockchain, and L
Publisher : Antis Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61796/ejcblt.v1i9.993

Abstract

This article explores the complexities surrounding the crime of killing or intimidation involving violence, aiming to differentiate it from analogous offenses. General Background: The prevalence of violent crimes necessitates a nuanced understanding of their classifications within legal frameworks. Specific Background: Scholars have expressed divergent views on the qualification of homicide and intimidation, prompting a closer examination of existing literature and legal definitions. Knowledge Gap: Despite significant discourse, there remains a lack of consensus regarding the parameters that distinguish these crimes from related violent acts, particularly in terms of preparation, execution, and attempted offenses. Aims: This study seeks to clarify the distinctions between murder, intimidation, and other violent crimes, offering a comprehensive scientific analysis of their characteristics and legal implications. Results: Through critical analysis of theoretical perspectives and legal interpretations, the findings reveal specific elements that delineate homicide and intimidation from other violent actions, particularly in terms of intent and methodology. Novelty: The article introduces a refined classification framework, integrating insights from criminology and legal studies to address the identified knowledge gap. Implications: The conclusions drawn from this analysis not only enhance the understanding of violent crime classification but also provide practical implications for legal practitioners and policymakers, fostering improved strategies for crime prevention and prosecution. This contribution underscores the importance of precise legal terminology in effectively addressing and mitigating violence in society.
Legal, Ethical, and Regulatory Challenges of AI Integration in the Judicial System: Between Efficiency and Fairness AllahRakha, Naeem; Fatih , Sholahuddin Al; Djumaevich, Khaydarov Shukhratjon; Nuraliyevich, Ruzinazarov Shuhrat
Prophetic Law Review Vol. 8 No. 1 June 2026
Publisher : Universitas Islam Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20885/PLR.vol8.iss1.art4

Abstract

The integration of AI into judicial systems represents a consequential and underregulated transformation in modern governance. This study is anchored in the accountability gap framework, which argues that autonomous systems create a gap between human agency and legal responsibility, and in the principle of due process, which requires procedural compliance and protection of fundamental rights in AI-mediated decisions. The study evaluates the opportunities and risks associated with AI in legal document automation, case management, predictive analytics, and decision-making. The study analyzes the ethical, legal, and practical challenges AI poses to judicial systems, including bias, accountability, transparency, and data protection. A qualitative methodology, including doctrinal analysis and document review, examined legislation, case law, and institutional frameworks, supported by empirical illustrations. The findings highlight efficiency gains, improved access to justice, and enhanced analytical capabilities. In response to the identified risks, the research recommends establishing ethical oversight boards, maintaining AI transparency logs, developing hybrid human-AI decision-making frameworks, and implementing robust legislative mechanisms. AI offers unprecedented advances in case management, improved legal research, and more consistent analytical support for judicial decision-making. Its deployment must be carefully and strictly regulated. The paper concludes that efficiency and fairness are not inherently opposed, but that realizing both requires moving beyond technical fixes toward structural legal reform.
Co-Authors AllahRakha, Naeem Fatih , Sholahuddin Al Nuraliyevich, Ruzinazarov Shuhrat