Let’s define it first: what is court automation?
Perhaps identifying the term “court automation” as progressive is most accurate, considering the dynamics in courts in the recent years. In the early stages of technology adoption, the term “court automation” was mainly used within projects centered on the delivery of computer equipment to support various court functions. Growth of knowledge and understanding of the mechanisms of various court systems helped vendors and their partners to narrow their focus towards using software to streamline workflow management for justice sector institutions.
This evolved into the modern “case management systems” projects which encompass a wide variety of digital tools and methodologies for automating processes within justice systems.
In other words, the general understanding of court automation is the introduction of technology both hardware and software to reduce or eliminate repetitive manual efforts associated with the processing of justice system cases.
The deeper understanding of court automation unveiled the opportunity to support not just a single justice sector institution but also to enable interoperability between justice sector stakeholders, including police, prosecutors, and judges.
COMMON COMPONENTS OF COURT AUTOMATION
|
Not all courts work is complex custom work and routine processes have different requirements.
Administering justice means delivering justice in individual cases. Regardless of the subject matter, the work of courts and judges is to process information; parties bring information to the court, transformations take place during the procedure, and the outcome is also information. Not all this information processing is a subject to complex customization. Default judgments and statements of inadmissibility are often routinely produced; many cases require a simple assessment without a hearing, and some cases are settled. Only a limited proportion of the cases that the judiciary must deal with, are complex, contradictory cases.
Court automation allowed judicial bodies to respond more effectively to the rapid propagation of the COVID-19 pandemic. The use of electronic means such as e-filing, e-service and electronic case management made it possible for court systems to remain operational. Rapid adoption of technologies that promote video hearings is considered a cornerstone for multiple courts while trying to minimize the impact of the pandemic on judicial operations. |
The main purpose of introducing technology is to simplify courts’ work so justice is served in a timely and transparent manner.
It is as simple as that. The digital arsenal has enhanced vendors’ capabilities making it possible for each court, despite its type, size or structure, to widely extend its processes towards automated paperless workflows.
Proper cloud implementation plan and methodologies can minimize a courts’ work while shifting to digital.
The key to successful implementation of any technology is to understand the three critical components that make up a healthy business environment. Courts and justice organizations are no exception. In our next blog “Implementation methods as key to successful digital transition” we will unveil the innovative approaches that can help courts automate their work without the complexity.
