Russian Justice in the Digital Age: Aims, Results, Prospects

Victor Momotov, President of the Council of Judges, Justice, Secretary of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation

The development of information and communication technologies and the ubiquitous presence of computers have caused radical change in many aspects of our being. Herewith, digitization, as opposed to other manifestations of scientific-technical progress, does not only change the technological paradigm, but also leads to societal transformations. The emergence of a single information space, based on the Internet global network, has become a distinct phenomenon of digitization, allowing us to virtualize certain spheres of modern life.

These changes took places in particular in the so-called state services sector. If earlier all the state services were accompanied by paperwork, significant volume of personal contact and written exchanges, now most of them are provided without the direct participation of a state servant. Today we see the concept of a citizen's "digital profile" realized for the purposes of personalised state services in the spheres of healthcare, education, tax incentives and many others.

Thus, the overall presence of electronic and digital technologies has become an inalienable part of modern life. The technological revolution has also significantly influenced the development of justice in Russia. It is now impossible to reach such aims of the court system as enhancing the efficiency, improving the quality and access to justice without taking into account the new realities, without using the cutting-edge technologies and solutions. Moreover, modern technologies have opened new opportunities for the development of judicial proceedings.

New technologies have allowed to significantly increase the citizens' access to justice, improve its quality and reduce the overall time needed for consideration of a case in court. They made it possible to introduce e-document workflow, assistive information resources and online services, to hold court hearings via web conferencing and much more.

Russia made its first steps towards e-justice and digitization already in 2006, while the coronavirus pandemic provided a new impetus for the development and use of digital technologies in the court system on the current stage.

The court system of the Russian Federation has been successful in transferring its judicial document flow into electronic form. On 1 January 2017, a system was launched that allows electronic filing of claims and other documents to courts of general jurisdiction. In order to ensure this opportunity, a new module called "e-Justice" was created for "Justice" State Automated System (SAS); it is joined by information systems titled "My Arbiter", "Databank of Commercial Cases" and "Databank of Decisions of Commercial Courts". Their functioning ensures the e-document workflow in criminal, civil, commercial and administrative proceedings, which allows to create a single information space of federal courts of general jurisdiction and commercial courts. The electronic form of court document flow makes justice more accessible, plays a role in ensuring security and acts as a safeguard against the human factor and abuse of functions. In particular, it excludes the possibility of documents getting lost during their transfers, which is especially significant when the case materials travel between courts of different instances.

At the moment, all citizens are able to file procedural addresses and documents to the court in electronic form, through their personal accounts. They can also receive a response on the merits of their addresses or the court act adopted in the case electronically. In 2021, 5 million procedural documents were received in electronic form, which is 2 million more than in 2020. The number of hits within "Justice" SAS has exceeded 3.7 billion. The courts have also sent more than 20 million SMS-notifications regarding the time and place of appointed court sessions.

Currently, the e-document workflow system does have its issues. For example, the law provides for forwarding of electronic documents, but at the same time presumes that the parties have them in non-digital (paper) form; moreover, the existing electronic form of documents does not allow to fully unite the various information systems. This is why we think that the relevance of e-document workflow [as a particular technology] will decrease in the future. In this regard, digitization of the document flow is one of the most promising trends of improving court proceedings. One of its features is that it allows to transfer information without using the classic document form; it also makes information storage, search and processing easier.

Russia is currently on its third stage of digitization of court proceedings: we are planning to broaden the remote interaction of citizens and organizations with the court at all stages of the case. We are introducing not only e-document flow, but also digital document flow, electronic request and presentation of evidence, electronic inspection of case materials, online hearing technologies. We are working to make it a general rule for court notifications and summons to be transferred electronically.

Of course, additional resources are required to make all this a reality. Broad use of cloud technology is necessary for storing large amounts of information; we also need to implement the corresponding measures and solutions regarding information security, transparency of court activities and ensuring that the access of citizens and organisations to justice is not obstructed. The development of electronic information storage and exchange also presupposes the improvement of the corresponding search algorithms, as well as the use of artificial intelligence for the analysis of judicial practice.

Taking into account this variety of forms of functioning of the judiciary and its interactions with the citizens, we need a single universal system that will combine the main technologies and make them accessible for a broad range of users. For this purpose, the court system has initiated work on the "Justice Online" superservice. It will form part of "Justice" SAS, will be based on the so-called "weak AI" and become the main pillar of digital justice in Russia.

The superservice will include such components as remote application to court in electronic form, court notifications, remote access to e-case materials, receipts of court acts or their copies in electronic form, remote participation in court sessions via web conferencing and more. The superservice will also offer assistive technologies that will help determine the competent court, calculate and pay the state fees.

The superservice will be accessible from any personal computer, smartphone or other device that can go online. We will introduce biometric authentication of trial participants via vocal and facial recognition, which will make it possible for them to participate in court sessions from their offices or homes.

The superservice will be integrated with other information systems, in particular the Digital Cloud Platform of State (Municipal) Services, the Digital Profile, the National Data Management System (NSUD). Creating this superservice will allow to bring e-justice to a whole new level.

"Justice Online" is scheduled to launch in 2024, however some of its components, such as the service that will determine the territorial jurisdiction over a case, the classifier of claims, state fee calculator and remote participation in proceedings will be introduced as soon as they are ready to launch.

I would like to also point out that the superservice will offer automatized drafting of court acts based on AI technologies that will analyze the text of the procedural address and of the case materials. In today's Russia, there already exists the legal, technical and technological background for the active implementation of weak AI that can help solve sphere-specific tasks. We are examining the possibility of using AI to help judges consider civil and administrative cases regarding unobjectionable claims, in particular in court-order and simplified proceedings.

In Russia, simplified proceedings are used in more than 75 % of civil and administrative cases in court of general jurisdiction and in over 60 % of cases in commercial courts. The use of AI in such a large volume of cases will allow to consider them through efficient and transparent exchange of electronic documents, easing the burden of the workload on our judges.

We also plan to use weak AI in drafting court orders. There is a pilot project currently underway at three offices of justices of the peace: the software is used to draft court orders during recovery of property tax, transport tax and land tax from citizens.

Of course, it is hard to underestimate the usefulness and efficiency of AI technologies: they help decrease the routine work of judges and court staff, automate input and processing of information during case processing, assist in consideration of procedural documents received by the court by pointing out their inconsistencies with procedural law and much more.

However, the use of AI and other modern technologies is also related to certain risks in the administration of justice and adherence to the rules and principles of procedural legislation.

For example, we think it impossible to replace the real judge with a universal artificial intelligence system, the so-called strong AI. AI is limited by the predetermined parameters and information; it can only assess the facts of the case based on formal logic, which means it cannot fully comprehend the background and the content of the case. In family matters or criminal cases, there are lots of issues of irrational, psychological and not formally logical nature, and an AI system cannot assess the motives of actions, discover the implicit goals, penetrate the depths of the human psyche, which increases the risks of biased and erroneous decisions.

AI is ignorant to the principles of humanism and fairness during sentencing, reasonableness and good faith in civil proceedings.

The inner conviction of a judge, her competence, fairness, respect for the participants of proceedings, decency and dignity, professional secrecy, tolerance, moral integrity and empathy are crucial prerequisites for the administration of justice, which cannot be embedded in any software algorithm.

In this regard, we are considering AI as a tool that can assist judges in their work, automate routine procedures, analyze statistics, etc. However, the key role and responsibility in the administration of justice remain with the judge. The use of video conferencing in judicial proceedings also has its own benefits and risks. The use of video and web conferencing has become ever so popular during the pandemic. Russia uses modern communication technologies, such as Zoom, Skype, VKS Vinteo and others. Every day, Russian courts consider more than 1,500 cases via video conferencing; over 290,000 court sessions were held via video in 2021.

However, it is not our aim to fully transfer to video court sessions; we consider in-person hearings taking place in the courtroom as a priority that is most fitting to the principles of effective and high-quality justice. Many controversies around video conferencing touch upon the issue of direct nature of proceedings, stipulated in all our procedural codes. The risks of communication distortion may result in loss of fragments of testimony and clarifications of the parties, which will make it harder for the judge to evaluate the evidence. Moreover, this distancing of the judge and participants of proceedings may lead to depersonification and formalization of proceedings, whereby one fails to see actual human beings behind the information and evidence provided.

Of course, taking into account Russia's territorial features, the location of courts of different instances (courts of appeal and cassation function on the principle of extrality, being located in regions different than the subordinate courts), the use of video conferencing will always be beneficial for the court system, but in every particular case it must be warranted by objective circumstances. The general rule of in-person participation remains a priority.

Moreover, we recognize the risk that intensifying the introduction of information technologies into the court system may lead to restriction of certain citizens' access to justice. Despite the comfort offered by digital technologies, remote filing of documents and participation in proceedings, we should take into account whether the citizens actually have the technical and practical capacities of using the offered services.

Lack of Internet access, communication means and technical skills among certain population groups demands that we preserve the opportunity to apply to court and participate in proceedings using the traditional method. That is to say, it is still possible to file a statement of claim or an appeal in paper form, obtain information from the court with the help of judges' assistants and secretaries instead of the court's website, to receive notifications via post. On the one hand this does not allow us to become fully digital, but on the other it guarantees the citizens' access to justice, ensures their ability to protect their rights and interests, which is a priority for any court system.

It is clear that digitization of justice is a long-term process, closely knit with the scientific progress, and that the emergence of new technologies opens up new venues for improving the work of the judiciary.

Technologies may well be a part of the court, but they should not replace it or become its substitute. The court performs such important functions as upholding the constitutional order, protecting rights, providing legal education, improving the level of legal consciousness and respect for the law, as well as many others. Therefore, we should speak about the efficiency of this or that digital technology only based on whether it assists the court in carrying out its honorable mission.

 

Victor Momotov

President of the Council of Judges Justice, Secretary of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court The Russian Federation

Born in 1961, Justice Momotov graduated from the Law School of Kuban State University cum laude in 1988. He pursued an academic career following his graduation, being elected Chair of History of State and Law Theory in 1997 and Law Dean of Kuban State University in 2007. Being a renown legal scholar, he was directly appointed Supreme Court Justice in 2010. Justice Momotov became Secretary of the Plenary Session (the full court) in 2013 and President of the Council of Judges in 2016. Since 2019, he is also a member of the Supreme Court’s Presidium, the top judicial body in the country. Justice Momotov has authored around 200 works on various issues of theory of state and law, civil, family, criminal and procedural law.