No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
The Italian Style of E-Justice in a Comparative Perspective
Abstract
The European Union (EU) is an extraordinary laboratory of innovation and change, particularly in the justice sector. The diversity of environments within Europe provides contrasting examples of the use of technology to support the administration of justice. This chapter presents some of the findings of ongoing research on e-government in judicial administration, which has been carried on by the Research Institute on Judicial Systems of the National Research Council in Bologna, Italy. More in detail, the chapter considers the Italian case in a comparative perspective. It illustrates the great diversity of ways in which EU members are harnessing information and communication technology (ICT) to support the operation of their legal systems, and it identifies different strategies as well as tools developed. Finally, it detects some critical issues and trends in Italy in comparison with the challenges addressed by other countries.
... According to them (2009, p. 136), the introduction and functionality of the e-Justice system, as managerial arrangements, "are built after a critical observance of everlasting problems". In this context, Fabri (2009) argues that the advancement of ICTs development in the judicial context is just a requirement for the successful implementation of e-Justice, not sufficient for achieving the end targets alone. ...
... There would probably be some sort of impracticality, the existence of too many techno-legal barriers, and difficulty in using the infrastructure and the services provided (Velicogna et al., 2020) since the e-Justice frameworks include various stakeholders, including those who never face a series of judicial processes. Fabri (2009) argues that several factors affect the success of e-Justice systems, particularly in the implementation process, as interoperability issues between intra-, interorganizations, and country systems, ICTs literacy, or negative perceptions at the end-user side but employee and institutional competency at provider side. Gascó and Jiménez (2011) assert that interoperability is the crucial element due to its provision of harmonic and cohesive functioning of different judicial systems and frameworks. ...
... Thirdly, we have observed some concerns following the implementation or postimplementation process. For example, Fabri (2009) takes attraction to the lack of project evaluations. According to Wallace (2009), whether and how technology is used "to create an accessible, inexpensive, transparent, and efficient system of justice could be evaluated as success factor" (p. ...
As governments are increasingly adopting digitalization reforms to improve public services, the justice domain is no exception. Although not as rapidly grown as the other e-governmentE-government initiatives, electronic justice or e-justiceElectronic justice (E-Justice) practices are developed and implemented to make justice services and their administration more open, accessible, effective, efficient, and less expensive for all actors. On the other hand, there are also specific challenges or risks involved in the digitalization of this area, such as the delicacy of the processes, legal restrictions, ensuring the independence of the judiciaryJudiciary, system design, and good user experience, and high interoperability. As a result of the relatively immature nature and the diversity of e-justice systems being used around the world, an integrated research framework outlining the specific areas and topics of research for e-justice and identifying future research directions is still lacking. In light of this gap, this chapter systematically reviews scholarly research on e-justice to present an integrated research framework. We identify 36 key research publications related to e-justiceE-Justice employing Web of Science and Google Scholar and review them to highlight what we know and do not know about e-justice. The study reveals four broad areas of foci about e-justice research in general: Identification of success and risk factors, assessment of the impact of e-justice implementation, examination of e-justice user satisfaction and experiences, and evaluation of judicial websites. For each of the research areas outlined, theoretical foundations, specific research aims, and main findings, and suggested directions for future research are summarized. A future research agendaResearch Agenda informed by the results of the review is proposed.
... They are therefore one of the pre-requisites for e-filing in a large number of European countries. Given the legal value associated with the digital signature, the standards and technological requirements are often imposed by national laws ( Fabri 2009b). The implementation of these legal standards has frequently been more difficult than expected, and required not only challenging software development, but also a long list of legislative interventions needed to guarantee the legal compliance of a digital signature. ...
... The local bar associations were unable to bear the cost needed to design and implement the interface required by lawyers to access the court platforms. This led the project to a dead end ( Fabri 2009b). The project was resuscitated and became a success when 'certified email' ...
... The cause could be that justice and law professionals are conservative and, in some cases, hostile toward technologies by emphasising bad aspects of it (Thornton, 2016). It is acknowledged that the justice system is embedded in high techno, legal, organisational, and institutional complexities (Contini & Cordella, 2015), which leads to low results of the digitalisation of justice projects, although the considerable resources invested in them (Fabri, 2008). For example, the last European Judicial System Evaluation Report asserts that, for now, it is only possible to provide the deployment indicators of IT tools for State Members but not the results of its use. ...
The deployment of e-Justice reforms aiming for more efficient and effective justice administration faces great barriers, even though considerable resources have been invested worldwide. This paper describes the factors that have enabled the Electronic Judicial Process deployment in Brazil. Currently, in the country, 98.9% of all judicial proceedings are held electronically. We focus on enablers of normative, technical, political, organisational, institutional, and related governance aspects. The research is important due to its potential to help other countries on their path to the informatisation of justice.
... Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) are increasingly affecting the core elements of the justice systems ( Lanzara 2009, 2014;Fabri 2009;Reiling 2009;Velicogna 2008). The changes that are taking place range from the modalities in which access to justice is granted to the reshaping of judicial actions and the outcomes of judicial proceedings, and to the reconfiguration of justice institutions ( Contini and Cordella 2016). ...
This book provides an examination of e-government frameworks and maturity stages in governments around the world, including an overview of the legal frameworks that have supported them. Divided into three sections, the first part of this book analyses the theoretical context of current policies, codes of best practice and their implementation. The second section presents case studies which bring key issues to the fore including open government, privacy protection, social media, democracy, systems failures, innovations in inter-organizational e-government projects, and open data systems. The authors demonstrate the importance of the successful implementation of e-Government for improving managerial efficiency, public service delivery and citizen engagement, with special attention given to developing countries. The book concludes by drawing out the lessons learned from the latest research and recommending solutions for improving the implementation of e-Government in the future, thereby helping to achieve more transparent, participative and democratic societies. This book will provide an invaluable resource for researchers, policy-makers, public managers, international organizations and technical experts.
... First, there is no research focused on the success of CMS within JS, whereby the contribution of technology to improving court performance is still unclear. Court management research has mainly focused on the descriptive analysis of the local JS, e-justice strategies, the evolution of software applications for courts, and the experiences of court technologies usage (e.g., Casanovas, Sartor, Casellas, & Rubino, 2008;Cerrillo & Fabra, 2009;Contini & Lanzara, 2008, 2014Doty & Erdelez, 2002;Fabri, 2003Fabri, , 2009Rosa, Teixeira, & Pinto, 2013;Velicogna, 2007Velicogna, , 2008. Second, research in this area has traditionally been concerned with mainly technological aspects, placing less emphasis on the behavioral dynamics involved in user and technology interaction. ...
This study takes a first step toward understanding the effectiveness of e-court applications in Italy. The proposed research model to assess the success factors for using case management system was tested in two Italian courts. Analysis of survey data from 314 users, using structural equation modeling, reveals the explanatory role of the model and the salient contribution of system and information quality variables on court staff’s performance. Our findings have important implications for theory and practice.
... It is true that very little AI has been applied to the legal field so far. Detailed descriptions of working e-Court technologies in Europe lead to the same conclusion [24, 25, 42]. It may be true as well that, compared to other kind of company organizations, the legal industry " is a surprisingly fragmented, undercapitalized and inefficient sector " [34]. ...
Information search and retrieval are part of daily routines of the legal profession. Lawyers, judges, prosecutors, and legal clerks usually access a number of electronic resources to browse, search, select, or update legal contents. Legal databases have currently become large digital libraries where the tasks related to information-seeking may sometimes be cumbersome. Adding semantics to support information search may provide significant results in terms of efficiency, efficacy, and user satisfaction. Semantic technologies may be able to improve legal information search in the judicial and lawyers' domains. However, legal professionals sometimes prefer following routines than changing their information search behavior. New trends in legal ontologies and Semantic Web technologies may help to improve both professional and laymen's skills.
The functioning of civil justice represents an essential aspect of the citizens’ quality of life and affects their trust in an institution that is one of the pillars of civil society. Citizens resort to civil justice when they believe their rights have been violated or they want to resolve a dispute. When dealing with “justice”, its evaluation and the citizens’ opinions about it are essential. Policies in the field of justice aim to improve the efficiency of the justice system but also the citizens’ satisfaction with it. Data from the recent 2023 wave of the sample survey “Aspects of Daily Life (A.V.Q.)” provide an opportunity to analyse citizens’ experiences with civil justice. In this study, we analysed the answers given by the interviewees using non-parametric tests, regression models, and correspondence analysis, taking into account the interviewees’ characteristics and some structural characteristics of the trial. By doing so, we intend to identify the determinants of citizens’ satisfaction in civil suits. The overall results highlighted the citizens’ experiences with the judicial process, the problems they perceive, their attitudes, and their opinions towards justice. This analysis represents the first step in checking the outcomes of recent changes in the organisation of civil justice in Italy. It would be the basis for monitoring the effect of alternative dispute resolutions (ADR), which are expected to expand justice efficiency and citizens’ satisfaction.
Objective : To develop a mapping of studies on innovation and digital transformation in the justice sector, publishes from 2001 to 2022. Five research questions were defined: 1) How to define innovation and digital transformation introduced in the justice sector? 2) What types of innovations and digital transformations are implemented in the justice sector? 3) What are the objectives of introducing innovation and digital transformation in the justice sector? 4) What are the antecedents that influence the process of innovation and digital transformation in the justice sector? 5) What are the results of the innovation and digital transformation process in the justice sector?
Methods : The systematic review of sources (scientific articles, conference
proceedings, monographs and institutional documents) presented in this paper was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) protocol. Selected by “research field”, “topic”, “research design”, “year of publication” and the keywords “public administration”, “public sector”, “e-justice”, “digital transformation”, and “innovation”, the sources were analyzed and evaluated according to five main aspects: (1) definition of innovation; (2) types of innovation; (3) objectives of innovation; (4) antecedents of innovation; and (5) results of innovation.
Results : The heuristic model for studying innovation in the public sector developed by Vries et al. (2015) was adapted and applied to the research field of justice. The adaptation of the heuristic model allowed forming the following areas of analysis: contextual antecedents in justice; institutional antecedents in justice; characteristics of innovation and digital transformation in justice; individual antecedents in justice; types of innovation and digital transformation in justice; results of the process of innovation and digital transformation in justice.
Scientific novelty : a comprehensive review of the literature in the field of innovation and digital transformation in justice is presented by adapting the approach to conducting systematic studies of the literature in the social sciences. It helped to identify gaps and define directions for further research in the given field, including the activation of comparative legal research, expansion of the methodological base, reliance on the theories of public administration, etc.
Practical significance : the obtained results allow forming a heuristic map of innovation and digital transformation in justice, create antecedents (contextual, institutional and individual) and the basis for future empirical research in the field of justice, analysis, evaluation and improvement of public policy in the field of innovation and digital transformation in this area.
The incorporation of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in the justice sector is not necessarily a new phenomenon. Nevertheless, the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic accelerated this process, as it required rapid solutions to mitigate the effects of social distancing and other security measures, for which ICTs proved crucial to ensure the continued provision of basic legal services. Initially used only for urgent matters, after two years it has become highly integrated into the regular functions of judicial institutions and is expected to continue as a critical tool against overburdened dockets. ICTs in the justice system can serve different purposes and can therefore be analyzed from different perspectives: efficiency in the administration of justice, interoperability between institutional actors, improvement of information for decision-makers, transparency and accountability, among others. This article focuses on access to justice. Therefore, it analyzes the ICTs implemented in Latin American countries, with a focus on the Chilean judiciary – particularly in the civil justice system – from a critical point of view, based on access to justice standards.
Due to the rise of digital transformations, the integration of advanced technologies in law courts globally is accelerating. This technological adoption enhances the efficiency and reach of justice administration, encompassing case registration, decision-making, and execution. This study investigates the acceptance and usage of e-court systems by regional governments in developing countries, utilizing the technology acceptance model (TAM) as the evaluative framework. As e-court systems become increasingly crucial in enhancing the efficiency and transparency of judicial proceedings, understanding their acceptance within developing countries becomes significant. It examines the role of perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU) in shaping attitudes toward using (ATU) in these systems, ultimately influencing the behavioral intention to use (BIU). Primary data collected from several regional governments employing e-court systems are analyzed. The findings indicate varying acceptance levels, predominantly influenced by the perceived usefulness of the systems in streamlining court processes. However, the perceived ease of use is less influential, indicating a potential area of improvement for system developers. This research contributes to the discourse on the digital transformation of judicial systems in developing regions, providing insights that could guide effective policy formulation and implementation.
A presente investigação tem como objetivo desenvolver um mapeamento de estudos sobre a inovação e a transformação digital no setor da justiça. Foram definidas cinco perguntas de investigação: 1) Que tipo de inovações e transformações digitais são implementadas no setor da justiça? 2) Quais são os objetivos da inovação e transformação digital do setor da justiça? 3) Quais os antecedentes que influenciam o processo de inovação e transformação digital do setor da justiça? 4) Quais são os resultados do processo de inovação e transformação digital do setor da justiça? Metodologicamente, foi realizada uma revisão sistemática de literatura e para tal foi adotado o protocolo PRISMA. Foram analisados 140 artigos científicos, conference papers, livros e documentos organizacionais sobre inovação e transformação digital na justiça publicados entre 2001 e 2022. Estes estudos foram analisados com base no enquadramento heurístico de inovação no setor público validado por Vries et al. (2015) que considera cinco grandes dimensões, nomeadamente 1) definições de inovação; 2) tipos de inovação; 3) objetivos da inovação; 4) antecedentes da inovação; e 5) resultados da inovação.
Society is increasingly relying on technology for daily business and activities. This is linked to a rapid update in technology use and digitalisation with courts required to consider new forms of in an electronic environment. The global pandemic increased reliance on technology for justice services and accelerated its integration in the handling of claims. This shift has brought with it certain disruptions. The normative framework concerning electronic evidence is fragmented and still underdeveloped. The handling of new forms of evidence clashes with the traditional paper-based formats that are not able to display all the characteristics of electronic documents. The new Taking of Evidence Regulation (Regulation 2020/1783) adds provisions related to this type of evidence, but this is only partly sufficient for completing the legal framework. In analysing the integration of this new type of evidence into legal practice, the work of Canguilhem regarding the normal and pathological is used.
The paper connects the potentially disruptive effects of Artificial Intelligence (AI) deployment in the administration of justice to the pre-existing trajectories and consequences of court technology development. The theoretical framework combines Luhmann’s theory of technology with actor–network theory to analyse how the new digital environment affects judicial agency. Then, it explores law and technology dynamics to map out the conditions that make legal the use of technologies in judicial proceedings. The framework is applied to analyse ‘traditional’ digital technologies (simple online forms and large-scale e-justice platforms) and AI-based systems (speech-to-text and recidivism assessment). The case comparison shows similarities and dynamics triggered by AI and traditional technologies, as well as a radical difference. While system developers and owners remain accountable before the law for the functioning of traditional systems, with AI, such accountability is transferred to users. Judges—users in general—remain accountable for the consequences of their actions supported or suggested by systems that are opaque and autonomous. This contingency, if not adequately faced with new forms of accountability, restricts the areas in which AI can be used without hampering judicial integrity.
This chapter will consider the Portuguese context, with a relatively ‘traditional' eGovernment successful development, to analyse the way eJustice and open judiciary have progressed. The aim is to provide useful insights which may be considered in other contexts (countries), including a reflection on the factors that may account for differences in eJustice and open judiciary development when compared to eGovernment and open government achievements. eGovernment, eJustice, open government and open judiciary development processes are placed in dialogue, in order to discuss the factors that have contributed to differences and similarities in both generic eGovernment and open government and specific eJustice and open judiciary development in Portugal.
The aim of this chapter is to shed some light on the Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) development and implementation in the justice domain (the so-called e-Justice), and to glance at the key elements of this emerging phenomenon, building on the European Union experience at national and Community level. Although ICTs are increasingly at the core of the functioning of the justice service provision in modern democracies, their implementation and deployment, and the complex intertwining between law, technology and organizations, which characterize e-Justice experiences, remains poorly understood. The analysis of concrete e-Justice cases allows clarification of some of the practical implications of different experiences, providing useful indications of the elements which have made feasible the development of effective e-Justice systems.
This chapter will consider the Portuguese context, with a relatively ‘traditional' eGovernment successful development, to analyse the way eJustice and open judiciary have progressed. The aim is to provide useful insights which may be considered in other contexts (countries), including a reflection on the factors that may account for differences in eJustice and open judiciary development when compared to eGovernment and open government achievements. eGovernment, eJustice, open government and open judiciary development processes are placed in dialogue, in order to discuss the factors that have contributed to differences and similarities in both generic eGovernment and open government and specific eJustice and open judiciary development in Portugal.
The chapter analyses the successful development of e-Curia, the e-justice platform of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Due to the institutional and procedural features of the Court, who deals with high profile transborder cases, complex multilingual procedures, and bulk procedural documents, development has presented new challenges to e-justice and e-government. To stay below the threshold of maximum manageable complexity, the project team has followed a development strategy pursuing the principle of maximum feasible simplicity by different means. The chapter analyses the strategy, the current functioning of the system, and the means used to reduce complexity, among which: ‘black-boxing’ through organisational or technological arrangements; building on the installed base of the users; avoiding techno-legal solutions that generate complexity; providing for smart switches between online and offline procedures. A light legal framework has established the ground for developing a platform. Once successfully tested by the Court and qualified users, its use has been made legal by a decision of the Court.
The aim of this chapter is to develop a research model to assess the success of e-justice applications in the Judicial System. Judicial System has been characterized by considerable investments in ICTs in order to improve court’s efficiency and effectiveness. Despite these investments, court performances did not increase and little research has been conducted to understand the reasons. Our research model adapts the DeLone and McLean’s IS success model and provides an useful contribute to understanding e-justice success.
This volume is devoted to the presentation of several research contributions from some significant European research projects
in the domain of legal technologies. In this domain European research has been particularly active in the last years, often achieving global leadership. This
is due to the commitment of individual researchers, research centers and universities, but also to the support of the European
Union that in various research programs has devoted a significant attention (and some relevant financing) to legal technologies,
considering them a decisive aspect of E-government and a crucial resource for the development of the information society.
This article deals with the role of public Prosecution and the necessity of combining at the operational level two functional needs that are difficult to reconcile: (a) to ensure prosecutorial independence; (b) to ensure that prosecutorial discretion be subject to the democratic principle of accountability, While a trend to redress the balance in favour of prosecutorial independence seems to be gaining momentum in several countries, the author uses the Italian case to demonstrate that the need for prosecutorial accountability be protected. In particular he shows that Italy by ignoring the need to render prosecutorial discretion accountable has de facto delegated to a totally independent prosecutor the definition of a good part of its criminal policy. The manifold dysfunctional consequences for the efficient control of crime and for the effective and equal protection of civil rights are outlined.