The virtual court hearings with Microsoft Teams, zoom and other platforms faced rise during the covid pandemic. With the new virus variants and the ongoing pandemic situation, courts expanded the use of virtual court hearing solutions for more types of cases and even started considering them as a long-term practice.
Our previous blog post raised important questions such as what are the risk factors behind eJustice projects? Naturally, the next question that comes is: “Which are the success factors for e-Justice systems”? How do we employ the risk factors into strategy that will deliver a successful e-Justice transformation?
We’re often being asked the following question: on what depends the successful transformation from traditional paper-based court case management system to e-Justice? Is there a path that guarantees a positive digital justice impact? If so, what’s the path that leads to negative effect and therefore should be avoided?
In 2021 the conversation about court automation is more vivid than ever. Depending on the problems different courts face, the conversation varies. These problems may be a growing backlog of cases, increasing crime rates, court schedule that is often being disrupted, etc.
When we look at the technologies that support the digitalisation of court processes, we may stumble into various terms. But perhaps the most inclusive one is court automation. Court case management systems, court scheduling software, judicial workflow automation tools – they all are being encompassed by the term court automation.
Conducting virtual court hearings and virtual court proceeding was initially met with a big dose of scepticism by judges, lawyers and other court users. Now more than 12 months living into the new normal, the sceptical voices are fading out and it’s more likely to hear a positive assessment of the virtual court hearing experience.