The beginning of solutions, systematically enough?

Inspiring as they were, the existing systems ended up bringing out some pretty interesting points.

We had started building more connections. So it started off by mapping the system, then finding faults and finally picking out some of them and trying to find solutions with the help of other systems.

..As the spread increased..

..A lot more inter-connections came out..

..And we started recognizing stakeholders involved at each of the points.

The two perspectives that we started looking from were:
One, from inside the Judicial System, and
Two, from the outside, from the litigant's point of view.

In the former, we looked at a few incremental solutions based on measures that were already being taken to speed up courtroom and administrative processes. For example, computerization has already been taking place for a while now. They will probably digitize the process of filing also sooner or later and make the process paperless. (If not, well, we could recommend that too! But there will be some amount of getting used to required before people will be open to so much technology.)

But technology is not our solution. In this case, we are trying to look at making the best of what is already being provided. So, if filing be digitised, can changes be managed from the office of the lawyer. That'll save a few visits back and forth and make things faster and more convenient.

Can adjournments be managed before cases reach the court? (Above is a small model of how it could work out) That should save some time in the courtroom.

If they are already planning to set up E-courts, how well can one harness the potential of the screen? A common one, or personal screens for the judge/s and the lawyer/s? Can navigation through case files be made faster? Or will it be detrimental? May be a few quick pointers will help the judgement; like the number of adjournments that have already been taken in a case might help the judge decide whether to give another one or not. What kind of information can assist the judgement of a judge? With so many cases in a day, how can one reduce the cognitive load on a judge?

On the other hand, when we started looking at it from the litigants' point of view, there came the question of how much information do they want, and how much do they need to make their experience less anxious and more easy. They must not be cheated at any stage either. So we started juggling on the idea of a call centre for the Judiciary. Taking inspiration from how in Passport Seva Kendra, the incorporation of a call centre made things much more transparent and the middlemen then became only and only middlemen who did their jobs without being able to change the clients exorbitantly.

In a lot of states, cases can easily be tracked online, but clients still call their lawyers or clerks to ask for the status of the case. It is because internet is still a luxury for a good part of the population. If there is a means of communication that is at everyone's disposal, it is the phone. Everyone from the village to the metropolitan has access to a phone, and in most cases, their own mobile phone.

So it sounded sensible to tap into this mode of communication, and then not just for tracking. One could take legal advice, could be suggested to go for Alternate dispute resolution to redirect cases from going to court, or could even be explained the process of the court to be able to represent oneself, which is one's right. It could be channelized either through the State Legal Aid, or the Information Centre in Courts.

That's what came to our mind till last week, and then we spoke to some people.