SPECIAL LEGAL METHODS IN THE STUDY OF PROBLEMS OF LAWMAKING AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

Abstract

Purpose. The study aims to provide a comprehensive theoretical and legal analysis of the content, essence, and classification of special legal methods in legal science under conditions of digitalization and globalization. It also seeks to define the limits of the use of information technologies (Legal Tech) in law-making and law enforcement activities and to clarify the conditions for preserving the methodological autonomy of legal dogmatics. Methods. The methodological framework is based on a system of general scientific and special legal methods. The system-structural method was used to determine the place of special legal methods within the multi-level structure of legal methodology. The dialectical approach made it possible to reveal contradictions between digital transformation in the legal sphere and the need to preserve classical legal dogmatics. The hermeneutic method was applied to interpret legal provisions and identify their substantive meaning. The comparative legal method enabled the comparison of approaches to the use of legal tools across different legal systems. Results. It has been established that special legal methods remain a key instrument for ensuring the internal coherence of the legal system under conditions of digital transformation. It has been substantiated that digitalization does not alter their essential nature; however, it complicates the conditions of their application due to the increasing volume of legal information, the dynamism of normative material, and the proliferation of automated analytical systems. It has been outlined that formal-legal, hermeneutic, and comparative legal methods play an important role in identifying conflicts, gaps, and terminological inconsistencies, whereas dogmatic approaches ensure the stability and logical coherence of legal regulation. Digital tools, in turn, perform a supplementary analytical function. Conclusions. Special legal methods occupy a central place in the structure of legal methodology, ensuring the logical unity, systemic nature, and legal certainty of law, as well as serving as tools for identifying and eliminating conflicts and gaps. Their evolution is linked to digitalization, which does not change their essence but complicates their implementation. In this context, digital technologies are regarded as auxiliary tools that enhance analytical efficiency without replacing classical legal dogmatics. Ensuring the quality of lawmaking and law enforcement requires maintaining the priority of professional legal interpretation and expert legal assessment.