Under conditions of technological transformation, the determining factor in ensuring technological sovereignty is the quality of the institutional environment for innovation activity, which is directly linked to the effectiveness of the interaction between law, as the basic institution of such an institutional environment, and its other foundational institutions — politics, the economy, and science. The study established that, at the present stage, law not only fails to exert a positive influence on the specified institutions of the institutional environment for innovation activity, but in certain respects also creates additional regulatory barriers to their development. The paper identifies a persistent structural imbalance of the institutional system, predetermined by a range of defects in the legal regulation of innovation activity and by the lag of legal regulation behind the dynamics of technological processes. The study has demonstrated that law functions in a «catch-up» regulatory mode, failing to provide the expected institutional synergy in the sphere of innovation activity and the required anticipatory legal regulation. 

The paper examines the legal nature of such a method of termination of ownership as the conversion of property into state revenue in the event of failure to provide evidence that it was acquired with lawful income, as established in subparagraph 8 of paragraph 2 of Article 235 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The author draws attention to the differing classifications of this method of termination of ownership as either a measure of civil-law or public-law liability, and provides a legal characterization of this institution. Taking into account the analysis of positions existing in academic doctrine, as well as the emerging judicial practice, the author concludes that the conversion of property into state revenue constitutes a measure of public-law liability. Special attention is devoted to the possibility of converting property into state revenue through anti-corruption claims in relation to subjects who enjoy constitutional guarantees, namely, judges. With regard to the conversion of judges’ property (including that of retired judges) into state revenue under subparagraph 8 of paragraph 2 of Article 235 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in proceedings brought by the Prosecutor’s Office, the author concludes that there is a need to develop new special legislative regulation of such relations, which would take into account the fundamental constitutional principles of judicial independence and inviolability in order to exclude any possibility of discrediting the judicial community.

The author examined the legislation governing the experimental legal regime and analyzed doctrinal approaches to the types of legal regimes of economic activity (the general legal regime, the special (ordinary) legal regime, and the specific (extraordinary) legal regime). In studying the issue of legal regimes of economic activity, the author points out that experimental rulemaking is implemented within the framework of the special (ordinary) legal regime. The content of the specific (extraordinary) legal regime is examined by the author through an analysis of legislation on the legal regimes of martial law, state of emergency, heightened readiness, and the sanctions regime. As a result of the study, similar features and significant differences between experimental rulemaking and the specific (extraordinary) legal regime were identified. The paper also addresses the implementation of experimental legal norms under the legal regime of heightened readiness. Ultimately, the author concludes that the legal nature of experimental rulemaking is characterized by universality, which makes it possible to apply it not only within the special but also within the specific legal regime.

The paper provides for an updated model of the federal structure of Russia through the prism of the 2020 amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Based on an analysis of the latest Russian legislation and the historical path of development of Russian federalism, the author demonstrates that, under contemporary conditions, the liberal approach to the construction of a federal state has been superseded and replaced by a conservative approach. Russia has transformed from a decentralized federation into a centralized federation while preserving the constitutional foundations of the state’s federal structure. The amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation with respect to the federal structure are characterized by a conservative orientation. This is evident in joint jurisdiction, in the legislative delimitation of powers between the federal center and the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, in the alignment of the legal status of the constituent entities while preserving their certain asymmetry, and in the strengthening of the «vertical of power» through its unified system. None of these changes turned Russia into a unitary state; on the contrary, they strengthened the constitutional principles of federalism while preserving Russia as a legal democratic state. 

The paper substantiates the author’s conceptualization of adaptive constitutionalism as a contemporary model of legal regulation capable of ensuring the stability and dynamism of the constitutional order under conditions of radical external and internal transformations. Based on a comparative analysis of nine modern constitutions from different countries and legal traditions, the study has developed a typology of models of adaptive constitutionalism. It includes the institutionally flexible model, the cultural-value model, the politico-legal transitional model, the judicial-interpretive model, and the latent adaptive model. The criteria distinguishing these models are reduced to three main parameters. First, this is the dominant source of adaptation — in some countries adaptability is ensured by parliament or constitutional commissions (the legislature), in others by the Constitutional Court (the judiciary), and in still others by public participation through referendum or a constituent assembly (the people). Second, this is the level of institutionalization of change: mechanisms of adaptation are either embedded in the constitutional fabric itself or function as mechanisms external to the text. Third, this is the degree of normative openness of the text: the possibility of flexible interpretation, broad formulations, references to international law, and open value declarations. Scenario analysis made it possible to identify four basic directions in the development of the constitutional order: evolutionary, reformist, transformational, and hybrid. Each of these scenarios is analyzed in terms of its internal constraints, resources of resilience, and politico-legal risks.

The existence of a procedural status for a person in a criminal case is an essential attribute of Russian criminal procedure, since it is precisely procedural status that characterizes the specific rights and obligations of an individual and, in certain cases, the possibility of bringing that person to liability. Procedural status is assigned either in connection with a person’s relation to the crime or by virtue of functional factors established by criminal procedural law, determined by the public-law nature of criminal proceedings and prompted by the need to establish the circumstances of the offense. Any change in procedural status must be based on the aforementioned factors. At the same time, modification of status sometimes entails a radical change in the nature of the person’s participation in the case; in a number of instances, the law enshrines the impossibility of changing or combining statuses. Three types of status modification are identified: transition, transformation, and combination. Transition is associated with a person’s performance of activity different from the initial one and is possible mainly within the framework of the prosecution. Transformation denotes the emergence of a new status together with the simultaneous loss of the previous one. Sequential transformation means that the subject acquires a qualitatively homogeneous status in comparison with the preceding one. Non-sequential transformation includes various situations in which the original status is lost and a new one is acquired as a result of the determination of the circumstances of the case. The combination of statuses is permissible when one status is assigned by virtue of a factual factor, while the other is functional in nature.

The concept of «deepfake» is examined in two senses: as deepfake technologies themselves, and as content produced through the application of these technologies. A definition of this concept is proposed from a forensic science perspective. It is shown that deepfake can be considered as falsified characteristics of a person’s digital twin, while the deepfake technologies used to create them constitute an illegal substitution of the digital twin’s characteristics with an artificially generated fake analogue. The insufficiency of legal regulation of deepfake technologies leads to wide opportunities for their introduction into criminal activities, especially in the commission of high-tech crimes. In this regard, the main trends in the criminal use of deepfake are analyzed. It is concluded that deepfake are an innovative means of committing crimes, the architecture of which is represented by a combination of software and hardware components. It is noted that deepfakes are used not only for the direct commission of crimes, but also for their concealment, while in terms of the forensic significance, they amount to staged scenarios. From the standpoint of trace formation, the specific nature of traces resulting from the illegal use of deepfake is highlighted, determined by the fact that these traces do not reflect real events. In forensic investigative science, deepfake should be regarded as a specific type of fake electronic digital traces formed during the commission of crimes and obstruction of investigation. Difficulties in criminal proceedings arising from the use of deepfake in the falsification of evidence are noted. It is concluded that it is necessary to develop practical recommendations and technical and forensic methods aimed at ensuring reliable detection and investigation of deepfake.

The author explores concepts aimed at explaining why evidence collected in violation of personal rights should be excluded, even at the cost of the truth of the verdict. Four theories stand out: 1) the theory of disciplining investigative bodies; 2) the theory of maintaining the legitimacy of the process; 3) the theory of the full protection of personal rights and 4) the theory of the annulment of unfair advantages. It is noted that the first two concepts cannot justify why excluding evidence is the best solution. The classic way to discipline violators is through legal liability. At the same time, the condemnation of illegal actions may well be expressed in a private court decision. It is also important to consider the risk of a backlash effect resulting from the exclusion of evidence: offenders may not only fail to be deterred but may also feel impunity, and the legitimacy of justice may be undermined by a deliberate departure from the truth (by acquitting the guilty or, conversely, convicting the innocent). The explanatory power of alternative theories is higher, but their action is limited by strict limits. The author concludes that the exclusion of evidence cannot be either a universal tool or an optimal way to protect personal rights in criminal proceedings.

In modern conditions of the need for dynamic scientific and technological development, ensuring the innovative, technological, and other creative activities of universities — as centers for generating new knowledge and shaping new skills — takes on particular importance. A system of partnerships, participation in consortia, and other science- and practice-oriented associations has become an integral element in the development of the modern university. At the same time, key issues remain the legal support within universities for technology transfer, the allocation of rights to results of intellectual activity, and the establishment of systems for their accounting, protection, and commercialization. The formation, in this context, of university-based enterprises for technology transfer and of effective partnerships at both national and international levels also raises problems concerning the realization of mutual interests, the motivation for cooperation between academic and industry partners, the design of business models for such cooperation, and the orientation of university entrepreneurship and joint activities toward ensuring different levels of technology readiness in the context of achieving technological leadership in specific technologies and production processes. The paper examines the problems of legal support for the establishment and operation of small innovative enterprises, small technology companies, scientific and industrial associations, taking into account relevant foreign experience. A number of conclusions have been drawn, including the point that, given the market-oriented nature of relations involved in introducing technologies and finished products into stream of commerce, intellectual property results that are more focused on protecting a solution in the market, such as trade secrets and software (computer programs), should gain particular importance for universities.

The paper reveals the basic aspects of machine-readable law as a popular concept involving the translation of the text of a legal act from natural language into digital format. It is predicted that the field of machine-readable law will expand simultaneously with the spread of digital technologies in the public administration system, as well as while giving various digital devices the greatest autonomy during operation. The paper presents various terms (with a definition of their content and specifics) that are used to characterize machine-readable law in legal acts in Russia and abroad: rules as code, legislation as code, machine-executable rules, machine-usable rules, semantic machine-readable rules, and machine-readable rules. The content of the Russian Concept for the development of machine-readable law technologies, approved by the Government Commission on Digital Development and the Use of Information Technology to improve the quality of life and business conditions is discussed. The main features of machine-readable law and the directions of its development, the difficulties of its implementation are highlighted, including the emergence of a digital language of a regulatory act, the creation of expert control, and the rejection by citizens. The key risks and threats that arise during the implementation of machine-readable law are also systematized. 

The paper continues the author’s series of scientific developments on the theoretical foundations of judicial enforcement in bankruptcy cases. The main driver of bankruptcy law today is judicial law-making. This is due to objective reasons: due to rapid socio-economic changes, the legislator does not have time to regulate the spheres of public relations that are the subject of bankruptcy law. Courts have to solve non-trivial tasks when considering bankruptcy cases in conditions of a shortage of legislative matter. The procedural form of bankruptcy proceedings is also far from perfect. These circumstances actualize the issue of the formation of judicial doctrines in the field of bankruptcy, namely special methodological principles implying scientifically based approaches to resolving insolvency cases. The paper substantiates the need for judicial doctrines in the field of bankruptcy law, suggests their concept, reveals their essential features, and distinguishes judicial doctrines from related categories. In addition, the study focuses on the contribution of Professor V. V. Lazarev (1940–2025) in the development of the Russian school of legal theory. It is emphasized that the theoretical and legal ideas and concepts of the scientist on the establishment and elimination of gaps in law, the role of the court in this process, an integrative approach to understanding law, the place of judicial practice in the legal system are relevant for the development of legal regulation of insolvency (bankruptcy).