PROBLEMATIC ASPECTS OF EVIDENCE IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS UNDER MARTIAL LAW

Abstract

The presented scientific article provides a comprehensive and thorough analysis of the specifics of the institution of evidence in the civil process of Ukraine under the legal regime of martial law. The research focuses on the challenges facing justice when traditional, long-established mechanisms for collecting, submitting and judicially evaluating evidence are significantly hampered or become objectively impossible. Active military actions have caused not only the destruction of court buildings and administrative institutions, but also the massive loss of paper archives, the destruction of original documents, temporary restrictions on access to state registers and a critical breakdown in logistical and communication links. All this often makes it impossible to obtain classic written evidence, on which most court decisions were previously based. In such extraordinary conditions, the domestic judicial system is faced with the urgent need to preserve the fundamental procedural principles enshrined in Articles 76–89 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine (in particular, adversarial status of the parties and the rule of law), while flexibly adapting them to the objective circumstances of the war. Special attention is paid in the work to the phenomenon of electronic evidence: digital documents, electronic correspondence in messengers, photo and video materials, screenshots of web pages and other data that are transformed from auxiliary means into key sources of information. The authors have analyzed in detail the complex issues of their belonging, admissibility, reliability and technical authenticity. Analyzing the modern practice of the Supreme Court, it should be noted the introduction of less formalized methods of assessing digital evidence. It is advisable to consider them in a complex, and not in isolation, since individual elements do not provide a complete understanding of the situation. During the period of martial law, these approaches have not yet acquired a rigid regulatory fixation. Instead, the emphasis is shifted to mechanisms for securing evidence and restoring lost court case materials. These tools are the most effective in counteracting the consequences of destruction, ensuring the real functionality of the judicial process in society, rather than its illusory nature. The problem of procedural deadlines deserves special attention in the study. The central issue is to prove the validity of the reasons for their omission due to force majeure circumstances, as well as in technical aspects, such as verifying the authenticity of electronic records without constant recourse to complex and invasive examinations. The work justifies the need to update the regulatory regulation of electronic evidence, in particular with clearer technical criteria for their verification. The general conclusion of the study indicates that without a conceptual reform of the evidence system under martial law, it is impossible to guarantee access to justice. It is necessary to achieve a balance between strict procedural form and the real capabilities of the parties in the current circumstances.