How electronic court proceedings work, or “Get up!” The court is in contact ”

[ad_1]

->

How electronic court proceedings work, or “Get up!” The court is in contact “

Analytic

04/30/2020 22:09

Ukrinform

In May, in Ukraine, the number of procedures outside judicial institutions will increase significantly – thanks to the electronic office of ESITS, or – “Electronic Court”

The possibility of “contactless” judicial proceedings using modern technical means is one of the main tasks of the EITI (Unified Judicial and Judicial Information System), whose large-scale modernization began after the adoption in 2017 new versions of the procedural codes (Code of Economic Procedure, Civil Procedure and Administrative Procedure of Ukraine). The system provides the courts with electronic case management, secure storage, automated analytical and statistical processing of information, appointment of judges to examine specific cases, selection of jurors, maintenance of the unified state register of decisions justice, etc. The building block of ECITS is cloud technology that enables remote processing and storage of data and gives Internet users access to IT resources and software.

What is “Electronic Court” in Ukrainian

Special software has been developed to hold court hearings. Now the system is operating in experimental mode. The mass quarantine of new technologies should be favored by the current “quarantine problems”. Some courts already hold meetings in videoconference mode – using the popular ZOOM app. But it has many shortcomings. The limited duration of the meeting (40 minutes) is the smallest of them. The main thing is insecurity in the face of external interference. In other words, it is impossible to use the program in the daily work, in quarantine, of the courts. How do ESITS developers solve these problems? And how does the national judicial system solve the other challenges that the servants of Themis had to face during quarantine and which, obviously, will significantly influence them over the long period of post-quarantine reconstruction of the country?

1. Technology and technical capabilities

Although videoconferencing has not yet become a full-fledged substitute for “offline” trials, it is used very actively as part of meetings and court meetings. The most striking example is the trial of the fugitive president Viktor Yanukovych with a connection from the Russian Rostov …

In total, according to the calculation of the Informationational Judicial Systems State Enterprise, nearly 54,000 videoconference sessions have been organized by the order of the national courts since the beginning of the year, thanks to the use of the special software EasyCon, which allows to communicate at great distance and at short distance. Thanks to this system, participants in the videoconference share information, documentation, entire databases, learn and, above all, can make collective decisions.

Since the beginning of the year, 53,581 videoconference sessions have taken place

In Lviv for the first time held a meeting in criminal proceedings in video mode. Photo / Facebook Irina Didenko

And more recently, plenary hearings have started to take place. “For the first time, we held a meeting in criminal proceedings in video mode. Everything clearly happened within the framework of the law. The participants in the process were identified and the process itself This has been made possible thanks to the high-quality EasyCon software, “said Lviv region prosecutor Irina Didenko. And he says: “The video format of judicial ambushes helps to avoid congestion of more than 10 people in the courtroom during a pandemic, and also ensures the participation of parties who live far away, which considerably reduces their costs and their travel time. “

“The quarantine feature” is precisely that parliament, after passing the “anti-coronavirus” law, has given parties more opportunities to participate remotely in the processes without leaving their homes, said Roman Kuybida, vice president Center for Political and Legal Reform, in a comment to Ukrinform. – Previously, this possibility also existed, but the participant in the trial should always have gone to the nearest judicial institution, where he was identified and ensured his remote participation in the trial, which took place in another court. Now the procedure has been simplified. And with the help of various videoconferencing programs, the parties have been more likely to have remote meetings, and the courts have had more tools to identify the parties. “

As noted in the state-owned enterprise Informational Judicial Systems, specialists are developing a separate subsystem that will expand the possibilities for the parties to participate in court hearings via the Internet, with authentication, electronic digital signature and encryption of communication channels to using cryptographic means certified by the State Service for Special Communications and Information Protection. Thus, it will soon be possible, without videoconferencing, to conduct videoconferences and hearings in camera, including in criminal proceedings. ny productions.

2. The regulatory framework

In accordance with the law on “anti-coronaviruses”, the National Judicial Administration of Ukraine has already approved the “Procedure for working with technical videoconferencing equipment during a hearing in administrative, civil and economic proceedings involving parties outside the court. “

To participate in the meeting by videoconference, you must first register using an electronic signature on the official web portal of the judiciary www.court.gov.ua. Then – at the latest 5 days before the hearing – the party must file a request indicating: the name of the court; case number; the date and time of the meeting in which he wishes to participate in videoconference mode; surname, first name and patronym; your status in a court case; e-mail address used to register in the system; telephone number to contact the court. The initiator must send copies of the request to other participants in the process at the same time. The day they receive the request to participate in the court session in a videoconference outside the court, they will be recorded in an automated document management system. It will also be given to the president of the court, who will decide on the possibility of holding a meeting by videoconference “provided that the court has the necessary technical capacities”.

And such opportunities, unfortunately, are not yet available in all courts. And this is one of the problems that are delaying the realization of the dream to operate in Ukraine of a full-fledged electronic judicial system, according to experts. In addition, according to them, we are talking about the need to finalize the software, the “psychological” and “professional” availability of courts and judges to work in a new way, reorganization and even corruption scandals linked to the public enterprise already mentioned “Judicial information systems” …

What prevents reform

1. The distribution of functions. Despite the fact that the SE “Judicial Information Systems” continues to advertise the “EasyCon” system on its website, on April 6, this software package was transferred to the balance of another state enterprise – the “Judicial Services Newly formed center. It will introduce innovations in national courts. And this process is not related to quarantine. The decision to create a new structure and transfer part of the functions of the ISS SE to it was taken by the State Judicial Administration in early February. The objective is to offload the “Judicial Information Systems”, which are responsible for the operation of all multifunctional ESITS. Furthermore, according to European practice, it is necessary to “separate” the service functions for participants in the processes and to provide technical support to the courts examining their cases. In particular, the State Judicial Administration refers to the recommendations of the EU “Law-Justice” project on the elimination of conflicts of interest, when a legal entity is engaged in the development and implementation implementation, testing and evaluation of the effectiveness of a software product and services.

“GP” ISS “serves two groups of users. On the one hand, there are 38,000 judges and court employees, on the other, litigation. And such a conflict of interest slows down the development of the system”, Leonid , then an adviser to the President of the State Judicial Administration, volunteered. Bogdanov. At the same time, he assured that we are not talking about “bloating of the States” and a managerial superstructure. Separate subdivisions of the ISS are reassigned to the new SOE. The “Center for Judicial Services” will be engaged in the maintenance, operation of the system and the open environment – that is, the provision of services to parties to the legal process, legal persons and individuals. And the ISS will continue to do ship maintenance – developing a new version of the workflow, maintaining communication channels, supporting equipment, maintaining engineering services that will perform the control technical in the field.

Some industry experts believe that the fact that the reform coincided with quarantine restrictions in the country will hamper the widespread implementation of the Electronic Court. However, due to quarantine, interest in new features is increasing. Consequently, the chances of innovation taking root in the field are greater.

2. Corruption scandal. However, this complicates the situation, whether it is unclear whether it is a coincidence or not, that literally the other day, journalists from Investigative.info published the results of an investigation into d possible abuses in the state enterprise of the ISS. The charges, in particular, apply to Leonid Bogdanov, the “ideologist” of reform at the level of the state judicial administration, who was formerly responsible for the technological direction of GAW, the former director of the ” ISS state-owned company, which participated in the development of the first versions of EasyCon, and, data from informed sources affecting the director of the Center for Judicial Services, Elena Netishevskaya.

Oleg Yakim’yak / PHOTO Pravo.ua

Colleagues claim that the videoconference service in Ukrainian courts does not really belong to the state judicial administration, but to a company registered in the house of Bogdanov’s wife. In addition, we are talking about an offshore company based in the Virgin Islands. And that – not only threatens to wash public funds, but also calls into question the announced security of the system against unauthorized influences. In particular, according to the lawyer, member of the Public Validity Council Oleg Yakimyak, the product developer can influence the functioning of EasyCon. After all, “the author, that is, the product developer, may limit the circle of people who have the right to improve it. And, therefore, may or may not grant someone the right This “someone” who will develop, or the developer himself will set the financial terms for his participation. As a result, the court will be forced to pay for his services, “said the lawyer.

Leonid Bogdanov dismisses all charges and says it now has nothing to do with EasyCon as an object of intellectual property, nor with a company that has the right to use development, nor with information justice systems and the Center for Judicial Services. In addition, the adviser to the president of the GAA assured journalists that the developer would not affect the use of the program in the Ukrainian judicial system and would not receive any funding for it.

Kristina Vengrynyak

3. Technical and material problems of the judicial sphere. Kristina Vengrynyak, Intecracy Deals legal expert on electronic document management, draws particular attention to:

  • Existing automation systems for courts, judicial bodies and institutions do not meet the technical protection requirements for systems where information with limited access is processed (personal data, investigative secrecy, medical secrecy, secrecy adoption, official information, etc.).
  • The system now only supports the exchange of office work data by exchanging data packets between heterogeneous database management systems installed in courts, organs and institutions of the judicial system.
  • The current functionality of the automated court document management system does not allow for collaboration with documents.
  • The “Electronic Court” subsystem needs to be further developed, integrated with other ESITS subsystems, in particular because of the need to register official electronic addresses and to differentiate access rights to consult court documents.
  • Remote access of ESITS users to any information stored in electronic form is not possible without a centralized user account management policy.

This list is continued by Roman Kuybida, vice-president of the board of directors of the Central Control Commission, who draws attention separately to the fact that far from all the courts have the possibility of ensuring the compulsory broadcasting of the meetings. “Unfortunately, in most cases – and during the quarantine in total, around 200 of these procedures took place – there was no broadcast. Either the judges did not pay attention to this standard, or the courts didn’t have no technical capabilities. Optionally, public access to the video will be open. For example, the 7th Administrative Court of Appeal (Vinnitsa) publishes the recordings of the meetings on its YouTube channel. This approach will not “find to criticize “with the fact that the principle of publicity in legal proceedings would not be respected,” says Roman Cuibida. And he explains: there are great threats to the recognition of the legitimacy of decisions that were taken “offline” behind “closed doors” during quarantine, when the courts prohibit the presence of people who are not parties to the procedure. Parties can use the lack of online programming to appeal decisions – up to the European Court of Human Rights. After all, the principle of publicity is provided not only by national law, but also enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights.

4. “Awareness” of the judicial administrations, judges and participants in trials. Experience in the use of electronic court procedures is not sufficient, although the decision to implement this system was taken almost three years ago. There are few examples of non-fragmented use of video communication capabilities, but of processes in their own right. There has not yet been an active awareness campaign on the benefits and opportunities that the Electronic Court subsystem offers to courts and judges.

Judges in the administrative justice system are more or less aware of these benefits. But the majority of judges in institutions of general jurisdiction have “heard only” something about the “Electronic Court”, and themselves have never worked with it. The ESITS Electronic Court subsystem outside the institutions participating in the pilot projects has not yet been tested.

“As a result, while Themis’ servants are reluctant to use the possibilities of electronic court proceedings. There are far more remand orders to refuse to hear cases from a distance than positive verdicts,” said Roman Kuybida. technical capabilities. “Although it is assumed that this is not entirely true. Because this occurs, in the same court – for example, the administrative court of the district of Dnipro – a judge holds meetings using the ZOOM application, and the other says “there is no technical capacity”. And it is quite difficult to influence such a clearly “subjective” factor. “

Quarantine courts: theory and practice

Конечно же, оживление дистанционного рассмотрения дел е Укринформ писал об этом. Каждый суд самостоятельно определяет график работы, порядок и способ проведения заседаний. При этом администрации судов руководствуются рекомендациями Совета судей Украины об ус ус ус ус Речь идет об ограничении и возможном переносе рассмотрения “несрочных” дел, снижении количества заседаний, проводимых в одном учреждении в течение дня, а также о соблюдении требований по безопасному пребыванию людей в общественных зданиях.

Роман Куйбида

Часть юридического сообщества критикует отсутствие “универсального” решения о карантинных л ус ус ус ус ус ус ус ус Другие же юристы считают такой подход оправданным, ссылаясь при этом на мировой опыт и на “букву” . “Совет судей не имеет права устанавливать единый режим работы для всех судов Такой регламент, по закону, может (при желании) определить только парламент Но сомневаюсь, что сейчас это уместно, -. Отмечает в комментарии Укринформу Роман Куйбида -. Уголовные суды вообще не . могут прекращать рассмотрения дел Ведь в этой области действуют весьма ограниченные процессуальные сроки, много оперативных обращений – например, о предоставлении разрешения на заключение под стражу, продлении срока содержания под стражей и тому подобное Единственное. суды ограничили доступ в помещения людей, не являющихся участниками процессов “.

При этом принятие парламентом 30 марта “антикоронавирусного” закона фактически заморозило осуществления правосудия по гражданским административным и хозяйственным делам. Из-за продления значительного количества процессуальных сроков. В частности, срок подачи возражений против иска, сроки апелляционного обжалования продлили донана Хотя, если стороны процесса проявляют активность и “синхронно” настаивают на ускорении рассморини

У экспертов “есть вопросы” к качеству коммуницирования судебных учреждений с людьми. “Большинство судов плохо информируют общественность о том, как работают в условиях карантина. Если, например, я приду в суд, то пустят меня или нет? Смогу ли я получить материалы дела? Можно ли обращаться в суд по электронной почте? На сайтах судов такая информация, в принципе, есть. Но “докопаться” до нее непросто. Обычно, соответствующие сообщения разрозненные и “спрятаны” где-то в архивах новостей. То есть, важнейшие для этого периода сведения не выносят на первые страницы, как это, например, делают в других странах “, – констатирует Куйбида.

Хотя в целом он достаточно позитивно оценивает то, как отечественная судебная система приспосиб Н у “п п Ведь из-за большого количества отложенных и перенесенных дел нагрузки на судей существенно воср. “Не поможет и то, что дел во время карантина стало меньше. В ч ч,, – О и и и и и “” “” Р “Р Р Р” Р Р Р й Р Р Р Р Р Р л т Р Р Р н

П т о,,, – Сейчас Высший совет правосудия рассматривает принятые еще в прошлом году рекомендации Высшей квалификационной комиссии судей при назначении на вакантные должности. “60 кандидатур, по моим данным, уже предложили на утверждение Президенту (глава государства по закону имеет 30 дней для того, чтобы определиться). Всего же в ВСП подали более 400 кандидатур. Ускорение их рассмотрения поможет хотя бы частично разгрузить действующий судейский корпус” – заключает Роман Куйбида.

Владислав Обух, Киев

According to the materials: ukrinform.ru

loading …

[ad_2]
Source link

Leave a Reply