STITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | I STITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | I Prosperity Notes Erica Bosio, Virginia Upegui Caro REFORMING JUSTICE Improving Service Delivery through Technology © 2024 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or currency of the data included in this work and does not assume responsibility for any errors, omissions, or discrepancies in the information, or liability with respect to the use of or failure to use the information, methods, processes, or conclusions set forth. The boundaries, colors, denominations, links/footnotes and other information shown in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. The citation of works authored by others does not mean the World Bank endorses the views expressed by those authors or the content of their works. Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed or considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522- 2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Cover photo: © Rymden / Adobe Stock file #194849644. Further permission required for reuse. TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments 1 Key Findings 3 Technologies enhancing judicial service delivery 4 The benefits of technological solutions 6 Introducing technological solutions 8 Conclusion 10 References 11 REFORMING JUSTICE 1 Prosperity Notes Acknowledgments This Note was written by Virginia Upegui Caro and Erica Bosio. Generous comments were provided by Daniel Ortega Nieto. Overall guidance on the Note was provided by Arturo Herrera Gutierrez, Roby Senderowitsch, and Adrienne Hathaway-Nuton. This Note is part of a series of thematic briefs produced by the Global Program on Justice and Rule of Law. The series highlights lessons learned from justice reform efforts and focuses on the “why, how, and what” of reform. This publication was funded by the generous support of the GovTech Global Partnership (GTGP) Multi-Donor Trust Fund which is supported by the Finance Ministry of Austria, the Ministry of Economy and Finance of the Republic of Korea, the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation, and the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs. For questions on this Note, please contact Virginia Upegui Caro at vupeguicaro@ worldbank.org. REFORMING JUSTICE 2 Prosperity Notes © ARMMY PICCA / Adobe Stock file #480232465. Further permission required for reuse. REFORMING JUSTICE 3 Prosperity Notes KF. Key Findings • Increase in budget allocated to investment in ICT is associated with improved court efficiency. • Technological solutions can streamline courts’ internal process- es and facilitate citizens’ interaction with the justice system. • Implementation of technology is part of a broader service modernization process comprising four stages. This Note explores the use of technology to enhance the efficiency, transparency, and accessibility of judicial service delivery. It examines how technological solutions can support the streamlining of internal court processes, facilitate access for court users, and support the quality of judicial decisions through legal drafting and research tools. The Note also emphasizes the importance of framing judicial digitalization within the broader context of public service modernization. This approach goes beyond mere automation and technological tools, encompassing the standardization of court operations, rationalization of processes, and development of regulatory frameworks that enable digital justice while protecting citizens’ rights to a fair trial, privacy, and security. Additionally, the Note highlights the importance of supporting all stakeholders in interacting with new digital technologies to build capacity and trust in digital justice systems, ensuring that these reforms are inclusive and effectively implemented. REFORMING JUSTICE 4 Prosperity Notes Technologies enhancing judicial service delivery Various actors interact in the courts to achieve an In Malaysia, introducing new technologies in the effective delivery of justice. These interactions Kuala Lumpur High Court increased the disposal occur within the court among judges, clerks, and rate by 200 percent by streamlining internal court administrators; between the court and other procedures and communications between the public institutions (police, prosecution, correctional court and its users (Hamin and others 2012). services, public registries); and between the court Cordella and Contini (2020) find that the improved and its users (lawyers, citizens, companies). New procedural standardization fosters a more technology solutions can: effective execution and coordination of case processing tasks. The authors also conclude that • Facilitate interaction between participants in the setting up e-filing systems allows more court staff court process to be dedicated to substantive decision-making • Support the streamlining of internal processes activities. • Improve accountability and transparency in court decisions By improving judicial service delivery, digital • Ease collaboration among different institutions technologies can promote healthier business involved in court proceedings environments and enhance economic • Provide better access to courts for some groups development. Lorenzani and Lucidi (2014) show of underprivileged users that increased judicial efficiency can lead to greater entrepreneurship and foreign direct investment. Indeed, recent evidence has shown that Improved judicial efficiency may also lead to technology has the potential to improve judicial greater productivity and investment by firms, as service delivery. Studies from Europe show that well as increased access to credit (Amirapu 2021, increased investment in technology is correlated Boehm and Oberfield 2020, Chemin 2009). In this with reduced case backlog. Using budget data context, ensuring that countries leverage digital from the European Commission for the Efficiency technologies to enhance judicial service delivery of Justice (CEPEJ), Lorenzani and Lucidi (2014) can play a role in fostering economic development. found that a doubling of the share of public budget devoted to in-court technology is associated with Technologies enhancing judicial service delivery a decrease in backlog and disposition times by 5 can be divided into two categories: back-office percent. Palumbo and others (2013) found a similar technologies and front-office technologies. Back- correlation based on OECD data, concluding that office technologies are those solutions aimed at dedicating a more significant part of the budget to supporting the work of judges and court staff by investments in new technology results in shorter automatizing everyday tasks required to advance trial times. Castelliano, Grajzl, and Watanabe cases. In turn, front-office technologies consist (2023) showed a positive correlation between of solutions that facilitate the interaction between electronic case processing and the efficiency of the courts and their users, including the electronic Brazil’s first-instance labor courts. Using data from lodging of claims, online exchange of procedural the six years before the COVID-19 pandemic, the documents, and virtual court procedures, to name authors observed that an increase in the extent a few. of electronically processed cases was associated A court procedure relies on several sequential with reduced case disposition times. stages to arrive at a decision. Back-office REFORMING JUSTICE 5 Prosperity Notes technologies reengineer these processes to advanced stage, data can be used to develop transition from paper-based to digital form. artificial intelligence (AI), such as chatbots, as an This transition goes beyond automation and interface to provide citizens with information and technological tools, and entails standardizing assistance about their claims (Ramos-Maqueda court operations, rationalizing processes, and and Chen 2023). developing case management rules. In addition to case management, technology can In paper-based systems, the user presents the simplify other court decision-making activities, claim to the court clerk, who manually registers such as document drafting and legal research. the case and issues a receipt notice. Each case The drafting system can enable the automatic development is annotated in a physical docket extraction of data from the ECMS to populate book, requiring the clerk to track every stage of the document templates and prompt the user on the process manually, thereby increasing the chances mandatory requirements to draft each type of of human error. An electronic case management document (e.g., writs, notifications, judgments). system (ECMS) enables the automation of these This can accelerate the writing process and operations, allowing the court office to (1) digitally ensure data accuracy. Legal research tools can register case information, (2) randomly assign the further support the decision drafting tasks, such case to a judge, (3) track case calendars and guide as legal information repositories that facilitate the sequencing of procedural stages (e.g., inform the identification of applicable laws and relevant of specific time and deadlines required for each precedents. With advancements in AI, this step), (4) schedule hearings and other activities, opportunity might help judges identify precedents and (5) notify the parties of case developments. applied in similar court cases. By automatically registering case information and In the interface of back-office and front-office documents, court offices can gather vast amounts technologies, courts have introduced solutions to of data that is valuable for other uses. Indeed, improve the recording of court proceedings. This collected data can be used to produce performance can increase efficiency, as judges can focus on the information for court administrators to decide flow of the proceedings and not on taking notes on resource and work allocation. By measuring during hearings. In turn, replacing handwritten how cases flow in the system, internal staff will notes with digital recordings can improve be able to (1) assign cases more efficiently by transparency and accountability, eliminating understanding each judge’s workload and how long potential vulnerabilities for corrupt behavior. On it takes to resolve each type of case, (2) measure the front-office side, recordings and transcriptions and manage judges’ performance, (3) address can enhance access to justice, allowing persons the causes of delays, and (4) substantiate budget with hearing disabilities to access real-time trial allocations. Reporting performance statistics can transcriptions and facilitating translation for non- also incentivize staff to improve their efficiency native speakers. (Chemin and others 2023). Technology also influences how courts interact with These data-driven interventions can also identify citizens, businesses, and other public institutions. which types of cases are more likely to be Front-office technologies may range from simple resolved through mediation and can suggest their interventions, such as setting up a website with redirection to court-annexed alternative dispute legal information, to more complex technologies resolution (ADR), freeing up space in court dockets like e-filing platforms, virtual court proceedings, for cases with higher litigiousness. At a more and online dispute resolution. REFORMING JUSTICE 6 Prosperity Notes The first step in digitalization is usually to allow files and information related to the case. E-filing users to access legal information online. Most systems can be designed to include different governments have set up websites containing functionalities, such as (1) an e-payment module basic information about court locations, how to file enabling electronic payment of court fees and claims, and the relevant regulations applicable to fines, and (2) e-delivery of deeds and summons each type of case. In some instances, users can facilitating the notification of the parties at the download pre-established forms to facilitate case different stages of the process. filing and self-representation, including information Courts have also introduced virtual proceedings on the documents that accompany their claims. to facilitate access to justice. These can be hybrid, These platforms can be complemented by online where some court users or witnesses can connect legal repositories, allowing the consultation of virtually to an in-person hearing, depending on updated databases containing laws, regulations, the circumstances, or entirely virtual, where and court cases. the judge and all parties will appear through a Once users successfully filed their claims, videoconference. These solutions can be especially courts may facilitate the communication of case beneficial for persons who cannot attend court milestones and the exchange of court documents in person, such as persons in remote or rural by introducing a case tracking and e-filing system. locations, incarcerated individuals, or persons This technology allows the parties to upload outside the court’s jurisdiction in disputes involving documents and access an online repository of parties in different countries (UNDP 2022). The benefits of technological solutions Digital technologies have the potential to enhance by clerks in handwritten notes, which were not drivers of judicial effectiveness and trust, such as completely reliable for accountability purposes. accountability, transparency, and accessibility. With the installation of these systems, audio Indeed, digital solutions can make courts recordings are made available within one day, more accountable to their users. The improved helping fulfill the hundreds of recordings being recording, transcription, and digitalization of requested every day. These recordings were court proceedings and decisions can reduce the used as evidence in a range of corruption and possibility for judges to act outside the law. In misconduct cases spearheaded by the National addition, it can enable the collection of accurate Judicial Inspection (World Bank 2017). A similar and detailed data for reporting and statistical technology was introduced in Kenya, where purposes, providing citizens with the tools to hold audio recording and transcription equipment was courts accountable for the quality and efficiency of installed in 26 courts. This intervention has helped their services. strengthen accountability and public trust in the courts by addressing potential risks to the integrity Romania, for instance, introduced a court recording of judicial proceedings (World Bank 2022b). system across all 233 national courts and 699 courtrooms. Before the implementation of the Publication of judicial decisions can further project, records of court hearings were kept promote an open and accountable justice system. REFORMING JUSTICE 7 Prosperity Notes For example, in Kyrgyzstan, judicial decisions are transportation, lost salaries) increases users’ ability published on a dedicated website that is publicly to meaningfully participate in court proceedings accessible to citizens. This website is centrally (Pew 2021). In the same way, technology can managed by one government entity in charge of help bring justice closer to rural and underserved court information and case management (IDLO populations. Tanzania introduced mobile courts to 2018). The World Bank supported Kenya in expand access to justice to vulnerable communities updating the website of the National Council for Law with limited access to courts. These mobile services Reporting, increasing the viewership of the Kenya were facilitated through the use of technology, Law website by 93 percent (World Bank 2022b). as these courts were equipped with computers, Similarly, a Criminal Court in Argentina regularly scanners, recording technologies, and solar panels, publishes court decisions and the calendar of which allowed them to function appropriately in upcoming hearings. The court actively incentivizes remote locations (World Bank 2022d). citizens to participate in virtual hearings and Digital solutions can also enhance accessibility collects their feedback on their experience with for persons with disabilities by enabling their digital proceedings (Hilaire 2020). equal participation in judicial proceedings Other technologies, like e-payment platforms, and by supporting proper channels for their can reduce the possibility of corrupt behavior by communication. In the United States, Alaska has reducing face-to-face transactions and keeping introduced technologies to allow remote court accurate records of online payments. The Judiciary appearances through audio or videoconference, of India established a digital payment platform using the latter to support sign language interpreting that can be used to pay court fees, fines, and services for people with hearing disabilities when a judicial deposits in district and high courts. Smart local interpreter is not available (G3ict 2018). court systems with e-payment modules are also To enhance impact and inclusivity, however, being piloted in certain courts in China and Kenya, technological innovation in the courts should try reducing the number of steps required to file a claim to consider the unequal levels of digital inclusion and increasing the transparency of transactions and literacy. Factors such as gender, income (Tashea 2021). level, and educational attainment impact people’s Technology has the potential to improve citizens’ possibilities to benefit from digital opportunities. interactions with the justice system by making it Technology’s impact will be negligible if citizens do more accessible and user-friendly. Indeed, digital not have the capacity to adapt to digital changes. interventions can help address geographical, The justice system can guarantee multi-channel economic, and other systemic barriers affecting access to justice services and ensure that people access to justice. These solutions can enhance understand how and where to engage with virtual service delivery for remote or rural users by providing proceedings. More significantly, new technologies alternatives to in-person court appearances and may seek to avoid worsening access to justice gaps reducing transportation and opportunity costs. for low-income or self-represented litigants. A study conducted in the United States found that remote proceedings significantly improved defendants’ participation in civil and criminal courts in several states, especially in debt collection and child welfare cases, demonstrating that reducing the costs of coming to the court (childcare, REFORMING JUSTICE 8 Prosperity Notes Introducing technological solutions Courts should be equipped with reliable electricity environment of digital court proceedings, such as and internet connections, as well as with the the existence of laws regulating digital signatures, necessary hardware and software equipment. digital authentication of documents, and data Many countries struggle to increase their network storage and management. This technological capabilities, given the surge in usage created transformation also impacts the critical substantive by new systems and communications. To tackle aspects of judicial decision-making, where questions connectivity issues, governments may assess their on procedural fairness and judicial independence network infrastructure to ensure that it reaches the should also be considered. In other words, the different locations where courts operate. regulatory framework can enable the legal validity of digital procedures and safeguard citizens’ rights In addition to network and equipment, another to a fair trial, data privacy, and security. infrastructural aspect to be considered is the interoperability of digital justice systems with The judiciary can consider strategies to ensure other government systems. As digital justice is continued capacity-building programs for judges part of a more significant effort of governments and judicial staff, including periodical training on to improve service delivery, these interventions digital skills and technical guidance from technology could be coordinated and complementary to the experts when needed. To effectively prioritize countries’ e-government strategy. Governments competency-building, the organization could first have often already established core e-services understand (1) what type of positions require digital such as e-signature, digital identity, and document skills, (2) what specific skills are required and at authentication systems. The setup of new digital which level, and (3) how these skills would be used justice systems can facilitate the interaction in judicial service delivery. between courts and other relevant institutions Effective digitalization begins with stocktaking the involved in judicial proceedings (e.g., police, prison effectiveness of non-digital processes to rationalize services,prosecution services), and leverage and reengineer analog services before their already established government-wide frameworks transition to digital format. As technology does not to support interoperability. exist in a vacuum, it is important to inventory analog An additional aspect to consider is the processes and services to eliminate potential establishment of a regulatory framework that obsolete procedures and streamline and simplify enables digital justice and protects citizens’ administrative processes to enhance the efficiency rights (Law Society 2019, Ahmed and others gains introduced by technology (figure 1). 2021). Regulations directly impact the enabling REFORMING JUSTICE 9 Prosperity Notes Figure 1: Court Modernization Process Rationalization Reengineering Digitalization Delivery • Eliminate obsolete • Administrative • Process automation • Multiple delivery processes streamlining channels • Mechanisms to apply and • Consolidate related • Eliminate unecessary deliver services online • Customer-centered processes and services documents and delivery • Inter-agency data processes • Review and simplify exchange and • Quality and delivery general legal framework • Review and simplify interoperability standards specific legal framework • Continuous improvement Source: World Bank (2022c). The first step in this process is rationalizing the developed their own way of performing certain services provided by the justice system before tasks and procedures. Correctly addressing these transforming them into digital processes. At this organizational complexities requires standardizing preparatory stage, it is necessary to create an and streamlining administrative processes. This inventory of services to identify overlaps and reengineering starts with mapping the entire opportunities to eliminate services that are no longer process required for each procedure, including needed. This inventory can be validated through the time, resources, and actors involved. After the a process that guarantees citizen participation. process is mapped, this information can be used Once the inventory of services is finalized, the to identify bottlenecks and potential areas for government can prioritize the services that may be simplification. reformed in the short, medium, and long term, as The third step is digitalization of judicial services, not all can be reformed at once. Criteria to prioritize which entails transitioning from paper-based to interventions include (1) services that are easier to digitalized systems and automating procedures. reform with fewer resources and time, (2) services Sequencing at this stage is critical, as front-office that are considered important by citizens or in technologies tend to depend on the digitalization high demand, (3) services that receive the highest and integration of back-office services and archives. number of complaints or where there is evidence of corruption, and (4) interventions that represent Finally, the last stage focuses on people-centered financial savings. service delivery, concentrating on users’ experience, and the monitoring and improvement The second step requires simplifying processes and of digitalized services. Governments can ensure services, as the implementation of technological the accessibility of judicial services by guaranteeing solutions may need new procedural rules and multi-channel delivery, where users can choose organizational practices to make them effective. between different alternatives such as website, app, One common challenge to the digitalization of or in-person court delivery. justice is the diversity of practices across different courts, as judges and court staff may have REFORMING JUSTICE 10 Prosperity Notes Conclusion When implemented correctly, technology solutions Still, while many countries are embracing the use have the potential to improve judicial service of technology to provide better judicial services, delivery. The transformational effects can already citizens and their needs must remain at the center be observed in the improved streamlining of judicial of digitalization processes. The introduction of processes through digital case management, technological solutions should not exacerbate court automation, and legal research and drafting existing barriers, as inequalities in access to digital support systems. Technology can also make justice services remain in many economies around the institutions and procedures more user-friendly and world. In doing so, governments must tackle the accessible by promoting access to information challenge of ensuring that all stakeholders, including and facilitating communications with the courts. judges, court staff, businesses, and individuals, Together, all these solutions can improve the have the ability to engage meaningfully with the new accessibility, accountability, and transparency of digital environment in the delivery of justice. the judiciary, potentially contributing to improved public trust in the courts. REFORMING JUSTICE 11 Prosperity Notes References Ahmed, R.K., K.H. Muhammed, S. Lips, K. Nyman-Metcalf, I. Pappel, and D. Draheim. 2021. A Legal Framework for Digital Transformation. SSRN. Amirapu, A. 2021. “Justice Delayed Is Growth Denied: The Effect of Slow Courts on Relationship- Specific Industries in India.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 70(1): 415-451. B Boehm, J. and E. Oberfield. 2018. “Misallocation in the Market for Inputs: Enforcement and the Organization of Production.” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 24937, Cambridge, MA. Brand, K. 2020. Designing Digital Justice: Balancing the Technological Revolution and the Digital Divide. vLex International Law and Technology Writing Competition 2020. Castelliano, C., P. Grajzl, and E. Watanabe. 2023. “Does electronic case processing enhance court efficacy? New quantitative evidence.” Government Information Quarterly 40. CEPEJ (European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice). 2017. Guidelines on how to drive change towards cyberjustice: Stock taking of tools deployed and summary of good practices. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Chemin, M. 2009. “The impact of the judiciary on entrepreneurship: Evaluation of Pakistan’s “Access to Justice Programme”. Journal of Public Economics 93(1): 114-125. Chemin, M., D.L. Chen, V. Di Maro, P. Kimalu, M. Mokaya, and M. Ramos Maqueda. 2023. Data Science for Justice: Evidence from a Nationwide Randomized Experiment in Kenya. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Cordella, A., and F. Contini. 2020. “Digital Technologies for Better Justice: A Toolkit for Action.” Discussion Paper IDB-DP-761, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC. Drossos, D., G. Lekakos, G.I. Doukidis, N. Tsatsa, and C.K. Coursaris. 2018. “Public-Sector Digitization: An Analytical Cost-Effective Framework.” MCIS 2018 Proceedings 38. G3ict (The Global Initiative for Inclusive ICTs). 2018. Driving Progress on Article 13 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Leveraging Technology for Greater Access to Justice. Atlanta: G3ict. REFORMING JUSTICE 12 Prosperity Notes Gouveia, A.F., S. Santos, and C. Herber. 2017. “The impact of structural reforms of the judicial system: A survey.” GEE Papers 64, Gabinete de Estratégia e Estudos da República Portuguesa, Lisbon. Greacen, J.M. 2018. 18 Ways Courts Should Use Technology to Better Serve Their Customers. University of Denver: Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System. Hamin, Z., M.B. Othman, and A.M. Mohamad. 2012. Benefits and achievements of ICT adoption by the High Courts of Malaysia. 2012 IEEE Symposium on Humanities, Science and Engineering Research. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Harley, G., and A. Said. 2018. “E-justice: Does electronic court reporting improve court performance?” Eurasian Perspectives (blog), January 22, 2018. HiiL (The Hague Institute for Innovation of Law). 2017. “ODR and the Courts: The Promise of 100% Access to Justice.” Online Dispute Resolution 2016. The Hague: The Hague Institute for Innovation of Law. HiiL. 2021. Use of Digital Technologies in Judicial Reform and Access to Justice Cooperation. The Hague: The Hague Institute for Innovation of Law. Hilaire, P. 2020. Digital Tools to Open the Judiciary: A Perspective from Argentina. Participo, an initiative of OECD Open Government Unit. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. IDLO (International Development Law Organization). 2018. E-nabling Sustainable Development: Lessons from E-Justice Programming in Kyrgyzstan. Rome: International Development Law Organization. International Commission of Jurists. 2020. Videoconferencing, Courts and COVID-19: Recommendations Based on International Standards. Geneva: International Commission of Jurists. (The) Law Society. 2019. Technology, access to justice and the rule of law report. London: The Law Society. REFORMING JUSTICE 13 Prosperity Notes Lorenzani, D., and F. Lucidi. 2014. “The Economic Impact of Civil Justice Reforms.” European Commission Economic Papers 530, European Commission, Brussels. McCoubrey, S. 2021. Emerging Technologies and Judicial Integrity in ASEAN. Judicial Integrity Network ASEAN, and UNDP. Oliveira Gomes, A., S. Tiessa Alves, and J. Traguetto Silva. 2018. “Effects of investment in information and communication technologies on productivity of courts in Brazil.” Government Quarterly 35: 480–490. Palumbo, G., G. Giupponi, L. Nunziata, and J.S. Mora Sanguinetti. “The Economic of Civil Justice: New Cross-Country Data and Empirics.” OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1060, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris. (The) Pew Charitable Trusts. 2021. How Courts Embraced Technology, Met the Pandemic Challenge, and Revolutionized Their Operations. Washington, DC: The Pew Charitable Trusts. Ramos-Maqueda, M., and D. Chen. 2023. The Role of Justice in Development II: The Data Revolution. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Reiling, D. 2012. “Technology in Courts in Europe: Opinions, Practices and Innovations.” International Journal for Court Administration 4 (2): 11–20. Tashea, J. 2021. “Justice-as-a-Platform.” MIT Computational Law Report. UNDP. 2022. E-Justice: Digital Transformation to Close the Justice Gap. New York: United Nations Development Programme. World Bank. 2017. Romania – Judicial Reform Project. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. World Bank. 2022a. “Interoperability: Towards a Data-Driven Public Sector.” Equitable Growth, Finance & Institutions Insight. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. World Bank. 2022b. Kenya – Judicial Performance Improvement Project. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. REFORMING JUSTICE 14 Prosperity Notes World Bank. 2022c. “Service Upgrade. The GovTech Approach to Citizen Centered Services.” Equitable Growth, Finance & Institutions Insight. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. World Bank. 2022d. Tanzania – Citizen Centric Judicial Modernization and Justice Service Delivery Project: Additional Financing. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. World Bank. 2022e. “Tech Savvy: Advancing GovTech Reforms in Public Administration”. Equitable Growth, Finance & Institutions Insight. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. Velicogna, M. 2007. “Justice systems and ICT: What can be learned from Europe?” Ultrecht Law Review 3 (1): 129–147. Prosperity Notes REFORMING JUSTICE | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | I 15 STITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | INSTITUTIONS | I