The article is devoted to researching the theoretical problems of OF evidence evaluation based on inner conviction in criminal procedure based on the analysis of Articles 95 and 951 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan. The concept of internal conviction was analyzed, the criteria for evaluating evidence (relevance, permissibility, reliability, and sufficiency) were investigated, and the problems of their application were identified. The grounds for recognizing evidence as inadmissible, including evidence obtained through torture, falsified evidence, and evidence obtained in violation of the right to defense, as well as the 2024 novelty on the inadmissibility of electronic data obtained without the participation of a specialist, were thoroughly examined. Based on statistical data from the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan, a decrease in the share of acquittals for the period 2020-2025 was revealed, which may indicate the presence of an accusatory bias in the formation of judges’ internal convictions. Comparative legal analysis revealed the advantages and disadvantages of the continental and Anglo-American models of evidence assessment. Practical recommendations include introducing additional procedural guarantees to enhance the objectivity of internal conviction, legally establishing mandatory elements of sentence motivation, introducing rules on the inadmissibility of derivative evidence, and reforming the system for evaluating judges’ activities.

This article is aimed at studying the role of such a non-traditional, hybrid tool as mezzanine financing in the context of insufficient flexibility and risk acceptance in innovative projects of traditional methods of financing entrepreneurial activity (bank credit, leasing). Mezzanine, combining elements of debt and capital, allows companies to attract large amounts of capital without reducing the existing share of shareholders and occupies a middle position among the top creditors and shareholders in terms of priority in the event of bankruptcy. The main part of the research consists of a comparative analysis of the legal regulation of the criterion. In the USA, this mechanism is regulated within the framework of the Uniform Commercial Code and the Securities Act of 1933, the most important of which is the criterion — the creditor’s right to immediate and out-of-court confiscation of the pledge of shares/stakes. In Great Britain, the “Companies Act 2006,” “Insolvency Act 1986,” and “FSMA 2000” rules confirm the structural subordination of the criterion and exclude its professional activity from licensing. The article details the relationship between the main participants of the mezzanine transaction — the borrower, senior creditor, and mezzanine creditor — their sequence, collateral object (shares/stakes), and income requirements. In conclusion, based on the similarities of the criterion with traditional types of financing in Uzbekistan, the need to implement relevant norms into national legislation, including the prompt introduction of collateral and providing legal clarity for private investments, is substantiated.

The article analyzes the growing conflicts between the parliamentary majority and the parliamentary minority in the ninth term of the Chamber of Deputies, the case law of the Constitutional Court dealing with them, and selected theoretical issues: a) the dilemma concerning the teleological interpretation of parliamentary law, b) the assessment of constitutional principles of parliamentary law by the proportionality test, and c) the unclear relationship between the Rules of Procedure of the Chamber of Deputies and the autonomous resolutions of the Chamber of Deputies.

ABSTRACT Most contemporary legal positivists accept the following two claims: first, that the law does not as a matter of conceptual necessity authorise or permit or the use of force, and second, that even if it does authorise or permit such use, most of the things it does have nothing to do with the permission of force. In this paper I argue that both these claims are mistaken. This results in two counterclaims: first, that the law necessarily permits the use of force, and second, that the law comprehensively does so. This second claim is the stronger and more unusual claim. It argues that whereas the law does indeed do many things other than permitting the use of force – like giving reasons, directing, incentivising, proposing, offering, empowering, etc. – it does all of these by means of permitting the use of force. Working out the corollaries of this second claim will prompt us to shift our understanding of how the law goes about directing action and what kind of authority it is.

This article is devoted to the study of the evidentiary process and the legal significance of evidence in civil disputes arising from housing construction contracts. The subject of the research is defined as the evidentiary activity applied in civil proceedings when resolving disputes on construction contracts, as well as the role of evidence within the judicial-legal mechanisms. The primary objective is to disclose both the theoretical and practical foundations of the content of evidence and the competence of courts in its evaluation when adjudicating such disputes. The relevance of the topic lies in the fact that transactions concerning housing construction are widespread, and the proper application of evidence in resolving disputes arising therefrom constitutes a crucial factor in ensuring fair judicial decisions. The methodology of the research incorporates analytical and comparative-legal approaches, as well as an empirical method based on the study of existing judicial decisions. The results obtained demonstrate that the improvement of mechanisms for collecting, presenting, and evaluating evidence in disputes related to construction contracts enhances the legality and substantiation of judicial rulings. These findings can be applied in practice, in particular by judicial bodies, as well as by the parties involved in the conclusion of construction contracts, in order to ensure effective protection of their rights and legitimate interests. The conclusion substantiates that the consistent application of procedural norms governing the use of evidence in disputes arising from housing construction contributes to legal certainty and the consolidation of the principles of fair trial.

This article analyzes the reforms carried out in our country to strengthen parliamentarism based on the Action Strategy, the New Uzbekistan Development Strategy, and the “Uzbekistan – 2030” Strategy, the 9 state programs adopted for their implementation, and the Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan in the new edition. Based on the analysis, ten main trends in strengthening parliamentarism and increasing the role of the Oliy Majlis in the life of the state and society were identified, and their essence was highlighted. At the same time, a number of proposals were put forward regarding the future prospects of the new parliament of Uzbekistan and the strengthening of parliamentarism.

The article is devoted to the study of legal aspects of ensuring the quality and safety of pediatric medicines in the context of increasing risks of off-label use and insufficient national regulation. The subject of analysis is the legal regulation of prescribing medicines to children, while the aim is to identify gaps in the current legislation and to develop proposals for its improvement. The relevance of the topic is conditioned by tragic cases of the use of substandard medicines in Uzbekistan, including mass poisonings, which demonstrated the vulnerability of the control system and the necessity of establishing special regulatory rules. The methodological basis of the study consists of comparative-legal, formal-legal, and systemic approaches, which made it possible to compare the experience of the European Union, the Russian Federation, and the United States with national realities. The study established that in the EU the development and implementation of the Pediatric Investigation Plan have reduced the prevalence of off-label practices and stimulated the creation of pediatric formulations, while in the USA and Russia the key role is played by the institution of parental informed consent, which redistributes legal liability and ensures the protection of the child’s rights. The practical significance of the research lies in the possibility of using the conclusions to improve the legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan, including the introduction of mandatory written parental consent for off-label prescriptions, the creation of legal incentives for pharmaceutical companies, and the adaptation of international approaches in the field of pediatric pharmacotherapy. The final conclusion is that the national legal system requires comprehensive modernization aimed at balancing the interests of the child, healthcare professionals, and the state.

V příspěvku pojednáváme o aktuálních problematických aspektech českého právního výzkumu. Ty spatřujeme v 1) neujasněnosti, které činnosti považovat za právní výzkum, jak je označovat, kategorizovat, jaké základní standardy u nich užívat, 2) chybějícím propracovaném systému vnitřní a vnější kontroly kvality výzkumných výstupů, 3) navazujících etických problémech právního výzkumu a 4) nedostatečném a nevyrovnaném financování výzkumu mj. komplikujícím práci akademiků na plný úvazek. Zároveň nastiňujeme novou typologii právního výzkumu, který dělíme na tři subkategorie dle výzkumných cílů na právní nauku, vědeckou právní teorii a empirický právní výzkum. S využitím této typologie dovozujeme dílčí řešení výše zmíněných problémů.