Information Technology Communications Between the Court and the Trial Participants, Between the Court and Other State Authorities

Problem setting. Today the public is acutely concerned about the problem of openness and transparency of court proceedings and the overall work of the courts of Ukraine. While community activists, and sometimes even some officials from the governing part of the state, questioned the level of judicial protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens and legal entities; accessibility, confidence in the justice system, which in turn leads to a deterioration in attitudes to the courts, their role and social significance; the formation of a negative image of the judicial system as a whole. Target of research. The aim of this work is the study and analysis of existing problems in the use of the rapid exchange of information between the court and the members of the trial, between the court and other state authorities. The object of the research. The object of this study is the practical use and legal consolidation of the use of information technology communications between the court and the litigants, state authorities, enterprises, institutions and organizations. Article’s main body. As of today a number of innovative technological processes has already been implemented and used for information exchange between the court and the parties to legal proceedings, and between the court and other bodies on issues of consideration of cases and appeals of court decisions for execution. However, as it turns out in practice, some of them are not perfect enough and needs to be aligned with the needs of their users in the legal and technical form. These are automated workflow system of court, electronic court, SMS subpoenas and notifications, data exchange with the Prosecutor, the request of the court on registration numbers of accounting cards of taxpayers, debtors and creditors and obtaining answers to them. Along with this there are those ones that have not been implemented yet or even which realisation is not provided at the legislative level: data exchange with the institutions of the State penitentiary service of Ukraine, the exchange of data between the court and the institutions of enforcement of judicial decisions, as well as the implementation of the functionality of online surveys and the online questionnaire of citizens ? visitors of the courts on the web-portal ?the Judiciary of Ukraine? and through information kiosks installed in the premises of the courts. Conclusion. Thus it is possible to make the next steps towards improvement and further development of the principles of the information space of the Ukrainian judiciary, eliminate negative tendencies in the nomination of the judicial system, the formation of the principles of implementation of the information openness of the courts and judicial authorities within current legislation.