Critical evaluation of new Council of Europe guidelines concerning digital courts

Marek Stanisław Świerczyński

doi:10.31743/recl.12588

Abstract

Digitalisation of courts plays an increasingly important role in dispute resolution. It has the ability to improve access to justice by facilitating faster and less costly access to courts, thereby making dispute resolution more effective and efficient. However, wide use of digital courts also has the potential to restrict access to justice. Attention needs to be given to issues of authentication and identification of the parties, digital divide, cybersecurity and personal data protection. This paper concerns recent guidelines of the Council of Europe that aim to fully address these issues and assist member States in ensuring that implemented digital techniques in the courts do not undermine human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms. The author answers and critically evaluates the specific questions and doubts relating to the content of the guidelines. The author’s recommendations can be taken into consideration by the Council of Europe in future updates of the guidelines.

Highlights

Digitalisation of courts plays an increasingly important role in dispute resolution
Its purpose is not to establish binding legal standards. It serves as a practical “toolbox” for member states to ensure that the practice of their digital courts comply with the requirements of Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention
New Council of Europe guidelines properly follow the structure of principles developed in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights under Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention

Summary

Introduction

It has the ability to improve access to justice by facilitating faster and less costly access to courts, thereby making dispute resolution more effective. Accelerating development of cyber justice in the European countries is due to the COVID-19 pandemic crisis It has forced the implementation of new forms of communication in legal proceedings[4]. On Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention”)[11], especially those provided in Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention[12] Such regulations recently take the form of guidelines prepared by the European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ).

T he purpose and character of the guidelines in view of the ECHR Convention

P roblematic use of the term “ODR” in the title and content of the guidelines

Summary and conclusions