There is a certain paradox in the fact that, while the world gives high marks to Ukraine’s achievements in the digitalisation of public and banking services, our justice system has still failed to digitalise fully. Now a lack of funds, now a lack of accountability held this process back for years.
Russia’s military aggression, however, has drawn particular attention to the need to introduce electronic court proceedings. When half the budget goes on defence capability, the state must think rationally and economise. We cannot afford to spend hundreds of millions of hryvnias on the countless stamps, envelopes and paper that the courts use in their work. That money should be channelled into better support for court staff or into other areas of developing the justice system. And, ultimately, into making justice technological, convenient and accessible.
What convenient and accessible justice means
The pandemic had already reinforced the global trend towards electronic court proceedings. Remote hearings or court sessions held in a mobile app surprise no one any more. The world is going much further. Only days ago a Colombian court even held a hearing in virtual reality, with the participants appearing as avatars in a virtual courtroom. Before that, the ChatGPT artificial intelligence for the first time helped a court to reach a decision, although it noted itself that it “will not replace the knowledge, experience and judgement of a human judge”. But what does convenient justice mean for Ukraine?
It is when consulting a case file simply means logging in from your computer or phone to your own electronic account and leafing through the pages of the case the way you do in an e-book.
When there is no need to wait weeks for a court summons and procedural documents sent by post, because they arrive promptly in that same electronic account.
When courts do not have to send out heaps of requests and wait a long time for replies, because they have instant access to all the necessary electronic registers.
When case files are stored in secure cloud storage rather than gathering dust in the bulky paper archives that accumulate for years in court premises. And when gathering statistical data takes a few clicks of a mouse instead of effectively halting the work of the courts at the end of every year.
When taking part in a court hearing is not a burden in itself but a convenient remote procedure.
When you do not go to the court to collect enforcement documents, but they are forwarded, on your instruction, to the enforcement officer of your choice.
And, finally, when war or any emergency is not an obstacle to access to justice, because such access exists everywhere there is Internet.
The state’s strategy
The introduction of electronic court proceedings is embedded in the Strategy for the Development of the Justice System for 2021–2023, approved by the President, and this issue is one of the priorities in the work of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Legal Policy.
The new composition of the High Council of Justice (HCJ) is likewise aware of the extraordinary importance of fully launching electronic court proceedings and is taking the steps needed for that. The HCJ recently renewed its special coordination committee on the implementation and roll-out of digitalisation in the justice system, co-chaired by the authors of this article and by the Deputy Minister of Digital Transformation.
By now we have worked through the issue of electronic court proceedings in detail with our international partners — USAID and Pravo Justice — and with the High Council of Justice and the State Judicial Administration. It is important and a matter of principle for us that the Ministry of Digital Transformation, which Ukrainians trust and whose experience our international partners rate highly, should be part of this process.
We are keenly aware that the digitalisation of court proceedings cannot be rolled out in full without first assessing the real current state of development and operation of the modules and subsystems connected with the existing Unified Judicial Information and Telecommunications System (UJITS). And since the HCJ has a standing commission on the UJITS, we have set up a working group within that commission to carry out a technical audit. The draft terms of reference for such an audit have already been approved.
Why an audit is needed
A full audit of the existing system will clearly show the current problems and gaps and will help us understand the possibilities and prospects for developing and rolling out a new system — one built on the best international experience.
This is the important step that is a precondition for the further work of building fully fledged and convenient electronic court proceedings in Ukraine. We are very grateful to our partners, who have agreed to take on the funding of this process. The Legal Policy Committee was one of its main drivers, and once the HCJ reached a quorate composition the principal judicial governance body joined the process as well.
It is worth recalling that back in 2018 work began on developing some of the subsystems and modules: the Electronic Account, the Electronic Court, the “Judiciary of Ukraine” web portal, the Judiciary Contact Centre, videoconferencing and so on.
Over that time the State Judicial Administration has managed to launch certain modules, but as of today these are only three out of the eighteen planned. What is more, the existing system is fairly outdated and contains a number of inconveniences that draw justified criticism from users. Members of the committee were able to see this for themselves while working on one of the draft laws relating to the operation of the electronic account. There is a problem in that some modules conflict with others, and certain modules cannot be updated at all. Why this happened is a subject for a separate conversation.
In view of all this, however, we have run up against a number of questions, the main one being this: should we rescue the old electronic system or develop and roll out a new one?
The first option means supplementing the existing system, rolling out other subsystems, replacing certain modules and extending its functionality. The second means modern e-case management, an e-archive, the digitisation of case files, and additional e-tools and platforms for communication and the exchange of documents between the parties to court proceedings
How financially justified and expedient each option would be is precisely what the audit is meant to determine.
How the audit should be conducted
We are talking about two stages of the audit — technical and functional. Already at the first stage it is important for us to have a full picture of the services available; their quality and effectiveness for users; possible shortcomings and risks; ease of use, and the storage and portability of data, and so on. Matters relating to cybersecurity and to data security and confidentiality are also very important.
We need conclusions and recommendations on each of the existing UJITS modules in order to understand what would be more expedient — further refinement or replacement of the module concerned.
Then, at the second stage — the functional audit — with an understanding of the problems and the technical requirements, dedicated focus groups will be held with representatives of the target audience, of 8 to 15 participants each. These will be judges of various instances, court clerks and practising lawyers. We will get an assessment first-hand, so to speak.
Ease of use, performance and cost-effectiveness are extremely important to us. With an analysis of all the gaps, we will be able to find the most effective solution and plan the next steps.
In fact we are already planning them, since the audit will not take that long. Our partners will need roughly a month or two to complete the formal procedures. The audit itself should take up to four months. Given how many years the question of digitalising Ukrainian justice has effectively been hanging in the air, these are quite reasonable timeframes.
Carrying out such an audit will be a genuine starting point for introducing fully fledged electronic court proceedings in Ukraine. It will give us a further understanding of the real needs of all users of court services, including in terms of optimising the resources of the judicial system — the modernisation of the courts’ material and technical base, without which an electronic court will not work. So yes, we are now moving confidently along this path, and many steps lie ahead. Some of them are being taken today.
What has already been done
Thanks to the joint efforts of the Ministry of Digital Transformation and the State Judicial Administration, the “Diia” app now lets you obtain, in just a few clicks, an electronic court decision, the full list of court cases in which you are or have been a party, and information about upcoming hearings. All of it quickly and conveniently, without unnecessary trips to the court and long waits in queues.
For its part, parliament is on the verge of adopting a draft law that will encourage many participants in court proceedings to use the electronic account.
It took us more than one year to get the courts access to the Demographic Register. At last, as early as March they will have it, which will save on average two to three weeks in deciding whether to open proceedings in a case.
We also have good news from the Ministry of Justice about the introduction of electronic writs of execution, which will likewise speed up the enforcement of court decisions.
We understand that the digitalisation of justice means convenience and faster case handling for citizens and savings for the state. Ultimately, it is about modern approaches to the work of the justice system that match international experience. That is why we firmly intend to make it happen.