Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Ilmiah Al-Syir'ah Khazanah Hukum
Yuliia Zaporozhchenko
University of Customs and Finance
Religion Humanities Education Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

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

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Human Rights and Features of their Protection in Conditions of War: International Legal Standards, Administrative, Constitutional and Criminal Aspects Yuliia Zaporozhchenko; Yuliia Leheza; Yuliia Volkova; Olena Pushkina; Marat Koval
Khazanah Hukum Vol. 5 No. 3 (2023): Khazanah Hukum Vol 5, No 3 December (2023)
Publisher : UIN Sunan Gunung Djati

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15575/kh.v5i3.33290

Abstract

The article is devoted to analysis of constitutional human rights and freedoms under martial law. The main focus is made on the analysis of human rights that may be restricted during martial law. Human rights are divided into absolute ones and relative ones. Absolute rights are determined as rights that cannot be limited under any circumstances. The legal definition of martial law is analyzed. It was found that martial law is the main legal basis for limiting the constitutional rights and freedoms of the person and of the citizen. Grounds for introducing martial law include threats to national security and territorial integrity. Attention is focused on the mechanisms and guarantees aimed at protection of human rights in conditions of martial law. Any restrictions on human rights must be justified, proportionate and necessary to achieve the legitimate goals of security and defense of the state. Affirmation and provision of human rights and freedoms is the main duty of the state. Therefore, during the legal regime of martial law the state cannot cancel its obligation to guarantee human rights. The list of rights which are not subject to restriction even during martial law, are human and citizen’s rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Respect for human rights is a guarantee of state power both at the national and international levels.
Legal Interpretation in Islamic, Romano-Germanic, and Anglo-Saxon Traditions Must Move Beyond Textualism to Respond to Digital Legal Challenges Yevhen Leheza; Bohdan Stetsiuk; Mykola Voinarivskyi; Viktoriia Sychova; Yuliia Zaporozhchenko
Jurnal Ilmiah Al-Syir'ah Vol 24, No 1 (2026)
Publisher : IAIN Manado

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30984/jis.v24i1.4092

Abstract

This article examines the interpretation of regulatory and legal acts in Islamic law, the Romano-Germanic legal tradition, and the Anglo-Saxon legal tradition in the context of contemporary digital legal challenges. The study is based on the research gap that previous studies have generally examined these legal traditions separately, while limited attention has been given to how they reinterpret existing legal norms when facing similar new problems, such as artificial intelligence, crypto-assets, smart contracts, and electronic evidence. Using a normative juridical method supported by a comparative legal approach and limited content analysis, this article compares the sources of law, subjects of interpretation, dominant interpretative methods, institutional authority, and flexibility of each legal tradition. The study finds that Islamic law emphasizes moral legitimacy and public benefit through ijtihad, maslahah, and maqasid al-sharia; the Romano-Germanic tradition prioritizes legal certainty through codified norms, systematic interpretation, and teleological reasoning; while the Anglo-Saxon tradition offers flexibility through precedent, purposive reasoning, and case-based development of law. The article argues that no single legal tradition provides a complete model for interpreting law in the digital era. A more adaptive model requires the combination of normative certainty, institutional consistency, interpretative flexibility, and value-based justice. These findings contribute to comparative legal scholarship and provide a conceptual basis for improving legal interpretation in modern law enforcement and regulatory reform.
Co-Authors Bohdan Stetsiuk Marat Koval Mykola Voinarivskyi Olena Pushkina Viktoriia Sychova Yevhen Leheza Yuliia Leheza Yuliia Volkova