Stanje u hrvatskom pravosuđu

On May 17, 2022, the Miko Tripalo Centre for Democracy and Law held a round table on the topic of Application of information technology in the judiciary in the University Hall of Zagreb. The topic of informatization in the judiciary arose based on the first survey conducted by the Centre in 2020, in which judges and lawyers identified that there is a problem in that area.

The results of the survey on computerization in the judiciary, which was conducted in preparation for this meeting among lawyers and judges, were presented in the introduction. The main results are as follows:

• Dissatisfaction with current platforms

• The unreliability (instability) of the e-book platform, which often does not work or works only partially

• System maintenance is not announced in advance, and is performed during regular business hours instead of evenings or weekends

• The system is not adapted to the needs of users and is often changed

• Application development does not rely on close cooperation with users, i.e. judges

• Judges are burdened with entering a lot of data, instead of the court registrar doing it

• IT equipment is outdated

• There are problems in cooperation between the developers and the users themselves

• The ministry managing the IT system would have to significantly improve cooperation with judicial practitioners and experts in court proceedings and its computerization.

The panelists assessed that some developments in the use of IT systems are positive. Notifying the parties is much faster and it is possible to find out what stage the litigation is in. In the case of enforcement, the procedures are accelerated to a certain extent. However, there are also many problems: inappropriate algorithms, inconsistencies, platform congestion and very frequent system crashes. Amendments to the ZPP made it possible to hold hearings remotely, but this did not take root in practice. Access to case law is not available to the general public: judgments of first- and second-instance courts are not available to parties or lawyers, but only to judges, although all case law (with very few exceptions) should be available to everyone, especially to parties who, without an insight into it, cannot they can achieve adequate access to the highest judicial instances.

Currently, a large number of cases and persons are affected by the computerization of judicial processes. The average number of new cases per week in eSpis is 35,000, about 500,000 cases are updated per week, and there are 7,600 users, which does not include lawyers. All cases are recorded in eSpis, except for cases in the land registry, and the number of unique visitors is more than 100,000 per month.

The transparency of the system is still far from satisfactory. It should be achieved that eSpis really becomes a service that is open to citizens. For this purpose, better use should be made of the considerable resources available within the framework of European projects and funds. An obstacle to the improvement of the system is the large fluctuation of responsible persons and IT specialists in the system of the ministry responsible for the implementation of computerization, as well as other limitations in financial and human capacities.

The IT system should be the main tool for work so that the entire system becomes more functional. IT systems in the judiciary should be available 24/7 and there should be no interruption in service. Instead of spontaneous changes that are carried out under the pressure of too short deadlines in order to achieve goals that are not always clearly thought out and specified, attention should be paid to a permanent and systematic approach. Decisions on digitization plans, on priorities and their implementation should be reflected in the organizational structure of the relevant ministry, which should have a permanent and competent service for computerization at a much higher position.

There are problems in the functioning of eSpis in relation to the typology of data and their use for purposes of analysis and statistical processing. In relation to some vital issues, it is difficult to obtain accurate and representative data. There is a lot of data in the system that is difficult to find and use in the right way.

In order for the system to become really functional, it is first necessary to clearly set its goals. It is necessary to have realistic expectations from digitization and set clear indicators of success: is the judiciary more successful, more transparent, faster… For this purpose, it is important to enable innovation with the participation of all stakeholders, and also enable verification through the implementation of pilot projects.

Overall, it can be stated that there is still a lack of a vision for the development of the judicial system based on which the judiciary would then be successfully digitized. Croatia does not have an independent, responsible and permanent team of experts that could be “blamed” or “praised” for the progress in the digitization of the judiciary. Because of this, Croatia is increasingly lagging behind other EU countries. The Europeanization of judicial topics was an opportunity for the digitalization of the judiciary, because the EU through NPOO and other structural funds enabled the withdrawal of significant funds. Unfortunately, the opportunity was missed to fully functionally use the large amount of funds that the EU provided to Croatia for the digitization of the judiciary. The largest part of the funds for the reform is devoted to construction projects, and not to designing innovative services, opening up to the public and digital transformation of the judiciary. What the true informatization of the judiciary would require is: the original digital file (maintenance of files without a paper “original”); full publication of all relevant court decisions; high degree of automation of routine procedures (eg online courts for some minor cases); integrated public online discussions and full insight of the professional and general public into the e-procedure; synchronous insight into aggregate data and statistical analyzes relevant to the efficiency and integrity of the work of the judiciary, as well as planning the transformation of the judicial staff and judicial institutions, which includes a further reduction in the number of courts (especially appellate courts) and the retraining of the judicial staff who until now were tied to old, pre-digital practices (e.g. retraining of recorders into assistants in digitization).

Based on the discussion, the following recommendations are proposed:

1.optimization before digitization: business processes should be organized first (design a court procedure that will meet the needs and expectations of users) and then digitization should be introduced;

2.the goals of computerization and digitization should be systematically set in the spirit of the best European practices;

3.it is necessary to enable innovation and introduce changes based on realistic goals through the implementation of pilot projects;

4.digitalization management should be led by an expert and capable team that has the authority, autonomy and responsibility to introduce changes over a long period of time;

5.in the computerization process, it is necessary to listen to science and the profession and to include all stakeholders in an appropriate manner;

6.computerization should systematically enable the transparency of procedures and greater public insight into the operation of the judiciary;

7.access to the SupraNova system should be made available to the professional and general public (lawyers and parties) without delay;

8.the system should be designed in such a way that all data relevant to the evaluation of the system’s development (eg duration of proceedings, workload of courts, movement of personnel and financial resources, etc.) are available for monitoring the effectiveness and quality of the judicial system and the fight against corruption.

Below you can view and download the results of the survey and the PowerPoint presentation: