The drive for virtual (online) courts and the failure to consider obligations to combat human trafficking – A short note of concern on identification, protection and privacy of victims.
Introduction
Against a background of austerity and with little empirical research, justice in England and Wales is undergoing significant transformation through the use of technology, which calls into question whether fundamental principles of due process are being lost in the mantra of modernization and efficiency.3 The UK justice system attempt at modernization includes the creation of an Online Court. The Online Court will designed to be used by people with minimum assistance from lawyers, with its own set of user-friendly rules. It is anticipated that it will eventually become the compulsory forum for resolving cases within its jurisdiction, and on inception should be dealing with straightforward money claims valued at up to £25,000. Recommendations are made on helping people who need assistance with online systems. Complex and important cases to be transferred upwards to higher courts. Open justice and transparency issues to be addressed.4
This article considers and asks how the implementation of these new Online Courts may affect vulnerable populations, such as victims of human trafficking. This is a timely contribution as the criminal justice system is currently in the process of introducing Online Courts through “an ‘agile’ approach to digital development.”5 However, “the criminal court proposals seem to have been introduced in haste, in many cases without research, evidence or informal or formal consultation with experts and stakeholders.”6 For this reason, an evaluation of the system at the initial stages of its implementation, is essential to provide important considerations for alterations and future developments and for other jurisdictions who may want to implement similar systems.
This article will begin by giving a brief explanation of online courts, their procedures and what their implementation seeks to achieve. It will then consider and discuss some of the negative and positive effects of the implementation and the potential future development of Online Courts on vulnerable populations, such as victims of human trafficking. This discussion will conclude that although Online Courts may have significant benefits for victims, victims of human trafficking, and other vulnerable persons who are often outside the vision of the law, they also risk becoming further ostracized due to the introduction and the development of Online Courts. There are also serious questions with regard to privacy and data protection and how the implementation of online court processes may act as a barrier to identifying victims of human trafficking. The authors, therefore, advocate for great caution to be used with the introduction of virtual justice and call for additional research to be undertaken in order to gain a clear vision of what the current and future effects of this new system may be.
Section snippets
Online courts
The introduction of Online Courts finds base in the Prisons and Court Bill 2017, which along other things “focuses on improving courts’ effectiveness by modernising and introducing online capacity”.7 Online Courts were also recommended by Lord Justice Briggs in his Final Report on the Civil Courts Structure Review
Human trafficking, identification and visibility
Human Trafficking was first defined in the UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children (‘The UN Trafficking Protocol’)32
The future of online courts: the worry of possible algorithms
Could however a technological advancement be beneficial in any way for identifying victims of human trafficking? It is tempting to suggest the development of an algorithm that creates a form of psychometric testing on those engaging with a justice system, perhaps through an online form that would flag up the potential for trafficking status. Certainly, this is not impossible, ‘machines are capable of not only ‘augmenting’ the processing and decision-making of functionaries and professionals,
Conclusion
New technologies, such as online courts, which are leapt upon without proper evaluation create real dangers for (secondary) victimization and fail to give necessary priority to the human safety and security, which flow from the obligations to combat human trafficking. It follows that technology is not the automatic answer to human exploitation and online courts or court processes risk injustice under the mantra of efficiency. That is not to say that there should be no duty on a court or court
Author information
Felicity Gerry QC is Queens Counsel in London and Melbourne and specialises in cases involving serious and complex criminal case, Professor of Legal Practice in the School of Law and Business at Deakin University and Ph.D. Candidate at Charles Darwin University School of Law, Australia. She researches in the fields of woman & law, technology & law and reforming justice systems and has published widely. She is a Professional Board Member, Computer Law & Security Review (Elsevier) (CLSR).
Julia
References (0)
Cited by (0)
- 1
PhD candidate, Charles Darwin Univeristy.
- 2
Briggs LJ The Online Court Counsel Magazine April 2016 〈https://www.counselmagazine.co.uk/articles/the-online-court〉