Spring 2023 // Canadian Government Executive / 11 PERFORMANCE pandemic made it even more of a priority. Simply accessing and adjusting to virtual services and proceedings, with participants in multiple remote locations, has required coordination (and patience). More consequentially, successful collaboration is essential for fair, accessible, transparent and trustworthy proceedings. An interviewee from a Canadian provincial Ministry of Justice and Attorney General states: “Maintaining the collaborative relationship across the different parts of the sector was one of the best results of the pandemic, and now we need to keep that in place. Future state An important role for leaders is fostering collaboration in order for all stakeholders within justice systems to have access to the information they need when they need it, an aspiration that requires robust IT systems. Several interviewees highlighted the importance of collaborating with citizens in planning modernization programs as a way to strengthen trust and improve public attitudes toward justice systems. “We need to think about ways to serve citizens, rather than just digitizing what we previously had,” says an official in a Canadian provincial Ministry of Justice and Attorney General. Understanding the needs of citizens and users is critical to provide more citizen-centric, accessible justice services. For instance, at British Columbia’s Civil Resolution Tribunal, an online platform was designed to be user-friendly and accessible, resulting in increased adoption rates. “By giving citizens a service they like, in a way that suits them, you can build far more trust than just standing on tradition. We need to make sure we have all parties, not just legal professionals, in the room to provide input,” says the Canadian official. Leaning into technology Current state and challenges The pandemic forced justice systems worldwide to shut down most in-person court proceedings and legal services in early 2020 and shift to online alternatives, with very little notice. Most interviewees cited investments in technology during the pandemic—such as laptops, routers, expanded access to internet and public web portals—to assist legal professionals and citizens in pivoting to remote work, digital hearings and online services, while keeping all information and proceedings secure. Now, organizations are returning to inperson and/or hybrid proceedings and wrestling with how this will change operations yet again. Technology can support hybrid processes, but leaders must think hard about how it can be used to build trust, rather than detract from it. Understanding the positive outcomes technology has enabled for legal professionals as well as participants (citizens) is a critical factor to also consider, so that they can be preserved, continued and expanded. “Some people are nostalgic and want to go back to the way things were,” a deputy attorney general in Canada says. “Our concern is about retrenching to the old ways. We want to sustain the movement forward.” Leaders must consider whether a return to long-established practices works to preserve tradition or best serves the needs of citizens and legal professionals. Future state Advanced technology, including AI and machine learning, can be harnessed to improve the efficiency of legal processes and services. For instance, AI can be used to recognize patterns in digitized legal documents and files or in complex cases that contain massive amounts of data. At the same time, professionals must remain cognizant of unintended consequences from advanced technologies, including AI. These might include depersonalization of legal proceedings conducted virtually, inadequate protection of individuals’ data privacy and security, and the erosion of institutional trust and equitable access to justice systems. In short, modern tools need to be used ethically alongside the expertise and humanity of justice professionals. This powerful combination creates a human-led,tech-powered approach that can help justice systems fulfill their purpose while delivering sustainable, citizen-focused outcomes. In our interviews, a clear consensus emerged that in-person contact between litigants and courts should not be completely eliminated. Clear criteria need to be in place to determine which cases are suitable for the virtual realm versus in-person. Additionally, virtual proceedings have highlighted the need for reliable internet access and digital literacy to guarantee that citizens, including those in remote and rural areas, can fully participate.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDI0Mzg=