By Ashley Young And Gavin Mackintosh -
A group of Mps have expressed serious concerns about the effect on access to justice in the Uk.
The group of 15 members have expressed discontent with the current court and tribunal modernisation programme, led by the Ministry of Justice and the senior judiciary of England and Wales.
They denounced the outdated court technology and called for better IT . They also said they have found poor digital skills, limited access to technology and low levels of literacy and legal knowledge raise barriers against access to new services provided by digital means. Insufficient steps have been taken to address the needs of vulnerable users, who lack adequate legal
advice and support.
The group recommend a network of assisted digital Online Centres to be extended to deliver comprehensive national coverage with walk-in access. They say the court system in administrative chaos, with serious staff shortages threatening to compromise the fairness of proceedings.
Mps want the Ministry Of Justice to publish ambitious targets for divorce
completion times . They also point to the difficulties cause by several court closures over an eight year period. In particularly, they lament the fact that between 2010 and 2018, half of magistrates’ courts closed, along with more than one third of county courts.
SUPPLEMENTARY VENUES
The Mps ambitiously recommended earlier this year that HMCTS urgently establish more supplementary venues (such as pop-up courts in non-traditional courts buildings), which should
be established in every area where there has been a court closure in the past 10 years.Another grave concern about existing court buildings is the fact many are dilapidated and lack the basics, such as facilities for disabled users.
The group said:
”The interests of justice are not served by unreliable video equipment and WiFi facilities
throughout the criminal courts estate; HMCTS must expedite planned investment
upgrading these. There is not enough research on the impact on justice outcomes of
video hearings and video links in the UK; the MoJ should commission this. Existing
access to online justice processes only via the gov.uk website should be discontinued
and replaced without delay”.
OPEN JUSTICE
The group of Mps have also called for open justice, that is, the public resolution of criminal and civil disputes.
”Open justice must not fall by the wayside. HMCTS should, in consultation with the senior judiciary, develop technological solutions to support open justice. We recommend that the senior judiciary convene a working group to consider how to protect and enhance media access to
proceedings. The Government should commit to piloting public legal education within
its action plan for legal support, with a view to rolling out a national programme by
2022”.
The complaints made by the group do not differ widely from complaints made in 2018.
A National Audit Office(NAO) 2018 report stated:
”Early progress in transforming courts and tribunals noted “significant financial and operational pressures” on the Government to improve the administration of the justice system.4 Many activities depend on outdated IT systems and/or paper-based processes that lead to inefficiencies and delays.
Lord Justice Briggs highlighted the need for substantial investment in digitisation in his review of the civil courts in England and Wales. He recommended the development and launch of an
online court for money claims of up to £25,000 by 2020”.
The NAO report also said that HMCTS courts faced a daunting challenge in delivering the scale of technological and cultural change necessary to modernise the administration of justice, and achieve the savings required.
A Ministry of Justice spokesman said:
“More than 250,000 people have used our online services in the past year, with more than 80 per cent satisfied with their experience. Those that struggle digitally can also choose to use paper versions, or speak to someone on the phone or face to face if they prefer.
“We don’t believe this report presents a balanced assessment of reform but will carefully address the committee’s findings and respond fully in due course.
P.S: This story was contributed to by both writers.