Innovation is a top priority

Dr. Erwin RoozeRosaconsult

eCase Management:an international survey in judicial

organisations

07.09.2009

Erwin Rooze – short curriculum vitae

Doctors degree in “scientiae administrandi” - on a thesis titled “Effective Strategic Problem Formulation” – how can IT provide support in this phase of decision making

4 years of experience in business & ICT consultancy for financial companies

6 years advisory within the Netherlands Council for the Judiciary – process management, innovation management, quality & knowledge management

4 years of experience as an independent advisor (international - http://www.ruleoflaw.nl/)

Key issues

Improving on Case Management is worth IT

Any judiciary has within Case Management three different “systems” that need support

Applying eCase Management is different for process types (special, regular, mass)

It is smart to learn from best practices

Law change is needed to enable electronic communication with courts

Outline of this presentation

1.Context of (electronic) Case Management

2.Three “management systems” in Judicial eCM!

3.What is the “electronic” in Judicial eCM?

4.International survey after best practices

5.Lessons learned on technology innovation

6.Lessons learned on change management

7.Key points revisited

1. Context of Case Management - goals

Desire to improve on performance Ability to handle more cases (no backlogs)

More efficiency (saves money) and effectiveness (e.g. safer society)

Assure consistent case handling

Faster completion times (justice delayed is justice denied)

Better service to the public (also electronic services)

Context - relevant “e”-policies in EU

E-Justice Provide a more secure access to legal procedures for all

parties concerned

E-Law Provide access to a database of legislation and case law

E-Democracy (e-Participation / e-Voting) Using the democratic potential of the information society

Eur. Commission for the Efficiency of Justice Access to justice, efficient and effective operations,

quality policies, protection of independence

Context – evolution at Court of Justice

Context ... total budget for judiciary

0,10% - 0,85% GDP (Courts, prosecution & legal aid)

Source: Cepej, 2008

Context ... the budget

More than 5%:- Netherlands- Ireland- Austria- Denmark- Montenegro- Norway- Romania

Source: Cepej, 2008

2. Definition Judicial Case Management

“The optimisation of primary processes in terms of completion time, costs and quality by managing the progress in case handling using logistic management, procedure management and specific content management.”

The Netherlands Council for the Judiciary

Other definitions Australia

The main purpose is to ensure that each case is resolved promptly and economically in a manner and at a cost to the parties and the Court that is reasonable in the circumstances of the case. So far as practicable, this means dealing with each case in ways which are proportionate to the:

complexity of the issues; and likely costs of the case.

USA / Saari to expedite the disposition of all cases in a manner consistent

with fairness to all parties, to enhance the quality of litigation, to assure equal access to the adjudicative process for all litigants; and to minimize the uncertainties associated with processing cases.

2. Management of Judiciaries

A) Case management – the primary processesManaging how cases are handled in proceedings of criminal law, civil law, administrative law

Using caseflow management or workload management

B) Court management – the secondary processesStrategic management

Financial management

Organisation and general operation of the court

Keeping statistics and making reports

Three “management” systems in CM

Logistics management Inbound logistics, distribution of files, outbound logistics

Procedure management Performing work processes that meet the requirements of the

law and quality standards

Justice content management Choices made by judges - tracks!

CASE

Logistics management

Distribution of documents, access to the file and recording of changes by people in the front office, the back office and the case handlers: judge(s) and clerk.

Systems: A large amount of small cases (6 pages) requires another logistics approach than a “mega case” of 30.000 pages.

Procedure management

Case identification Checking the inbound documents

Case registration Who determines the court fees and how is it collected?

Scheduling case events How to control the progress after the hearing or trial?

Having a court session Writing the court decision (and quality control) Sending and publication of the court decision Closing the case and storing final records (archiving) Management on the total completion time

Justice content management

UK is well known for its tracks Small claims, fast track, multi track

Netherlands Law: small claims in a different procedure

Judge: Differentiation in case development Oral or written route within a civil procedure

Judge: Referral of cases to ADR

Management and process types

Special

Mass

RegularVolume of cases

Low

High

Complexity of casesHighLow

3. The “electronics” in eCM

- Decision support for selectingan efficient and effective “track”- Electronic decision forms - Tools to structure a case

Workflow for file distributionTracking and tracingCapacity allocation

Automatic actionsControl on milestonesDelegating tasks

Place among other technologies

Electronic inbound logistics Electronic initiation of a court procedure Electronic filing of documents

Electronic case handling Automated administration Digital workflow of documents and tasks Planning events, availability and milestones

Electronic outbound logistics Electronic sending to parties & digital archiving Electronic publication of case law

“Electronic Logistics” in eCM

Core

e-Justice

e-Law

ICT in procedural steps

Administration of changes in the case Automatic collection of court fees Informing judges on milestones (time limits) Using video conferencing in court sessions Recording of proceedings Support in making court documents

Different systems for process types?

Special

Mass

RegularVolume of cases

Low

High

Complexity of casesHighLow

+ Reengineer& automate?

Control

+ DocumentSupport?

4. International survey

Three partners Focus:

Business / Strategy

Technology

Organization and Change

Countries selected

Austria – Mahnverfahren: digitization of inbound and outbound logistics (6,6 mln digital documents)

Western Australia – ICMS project: integral approach

Belgium – Phenix project: major law changes 2007

Finland – Automation of post delivery (e-letters) 1999 and online query

Italy – workflow management 2000

Estonia – digital signature by courts 2003

Romania – Ecris 2002 allows the standardization of the activities and procedures and the automatic publication and distribution of files

Austria - goals

Offer electronic justice to the public

Make information better available to the public

Integrated text processing

On line help and strong search capabilities

Publication of court decisions on the Internet

Integrated electronic and paper postal office

Digital archives

Austria – Mahnverfahren (Payment order)

Austria – Mahnverfahren II

Electronic legal communication (85% of all civil claims are sent electronically > 2 mln)

Mailing facility for all outbound documents Automatic collection of court fees In case of objection, data can be used in Court

Automation for trial Automatic checks (proposal for decision) Automatic monitoring of period of objection and

enforceability

Western Australia - goals

Business policy: More flexibility in case of changes of legislation

More transparency by making information better available

Handle more cases faster with smaller budgets

Technological: Improve maintenance by creating a single uniform

integrated system

Make lodging of electronic documents possible

Western Australia – development ICMS

2007

2005

2003

2002

Estonia - Digital signature

Personal Data file Copies the visual information

Can be read without restriction

Certificate for identification Different infosystems

Signing of e-mails

Certificate for Digital signatures No limitations in scope or use

Equivalent to hand written signatures

Finland: electronic post & online query

Kyösti – online query on operational database The general public can get information on pending

case of courts of appeal and the supreme court

Available is bibliographic information of the cases, the names of the parties and the phases in the court procedure.

The system plays a large role in developing more openness in court procedures

Romania – Ecris

Consists of a Case and Document Management System (CDMS) and a Legal Library and Documentation Systems (LLDS)

In 2001 ECRIS was first installed and the Romanian Supreme Court of Justice within a programme financed by The Netherlands (a MATRA project). The project was a success, optimizing the work of personnel by decreasing their workload while improving quality.

ECRIS covers all relevant business processes within the justice system: Scheduling, Dossier generation, Subpoena, Evaluation of petitions, Investigation, Judgment, Archive,

Report production

5. Lessons on technology innovation

A mixed view on internal electronic operations Lots of experience with appliance on mass type Focused structuring of files is necessary Digitization makes procedure innovation possible The need of the judiciary for workflow

management is not unique A shared service center for outbound mail

(paper/electronic) has high benefits

Functionalities found in eCase Management

6. Lessons on change management

The application of eCase Management should be different for different types of primary processes (mass / regular / special)

An iterative development approach works Making it easy and economic to provide material

to the court in electronic form really works Analysis of the similarities in work processes is

necessary (business architecture) For digitization the legislation must be amended

7. Key issues - revisited

Improving on Case Management is worth IT

Any judiciary has within Case Management three different “systems” that need support

Applying Judicial Case Management differs for process types (special, regular, mass)

It is smart to learn from best practices

Law change is needed to enable electronic communication with courts

Innovation is a top priority

dr Erwin J. Rooze

www.ruleoflaw.nl

eCase Management: an international survey in judicial

organisations