In 1990 a group of New Zealand Judges in both the High and District Courts discussed the possibility of using computers to assist in their Judicial work. They identified the following areas where computers could assist in judicial activity:

1. The editing and writing of judgments

2. Access to Jury Trial Directions, Bench Books and other frequently used research materials

3. Sentencing information

4. Litigation support

5. Access to research material and larger research databases.

It is probably pertinent to point out that the New Zealand Court system, from a judicial perspective was and still is largely a manual system with a few exceptions. The record of evidence is typed on a word processor in the High Court and in District Court in cases of longer than a day’s hearing time. The CAT system of evidence recording is largely absent, although there are some Courthouses in New Zealand where it is used. Generally in the District Court the Judge keeps a handwritten record of his or her own notes and decisions and dispositions are similarly recorded, but entered onto a computer by the administration. Evidence of witnesses in hearings of a day or less is recorded on tape.

It was recognised by the then Justice Department, which was charged with providing services to the Courts, that the broader implications of information technology would have to be addressed. Part of that would involve providing computers and computer services for the Judiciary. Thus, an approach by the Judiciary was welcomed and timely.

Over the last seven years computers have been supplied to all those members of the New Zealand Judiciary who want them. At the moment the machines used are Toshiba Satellite 300 CDT/Pro 470 CDT notebooks with 1.37 gb hard drives, a colour screen, 32 mb RAM, a PCMCIA card running Windows 3.1 and Microsoft Office. Local area networks have been set up in 7 of the main Courthouses. Provision is also available for remote access e-mail for Judges who are not at LAN sites. A system is now in place whereby a computer is supplied to a new appointee to the Bench if she or he wants one.

When a Judge receives his or her computer in addition to the standard software provided a number of special items are made available. Benchbooks and standard jury trial directions (charges) are basic items and are provided as read-only word processing documents. If a judge wants to customise a direction he/she may do a copy and paste operation and may maintain a library of personalised directions.

It is recognised, of course, that every decision must be that of the Judge. There is a frequently expressed worry that the decision making process and the result of that process will be surrendered to a computer, thus removing the essential "human" element. This, of course, is not the case. But it has been demonstrated that a computer can efficiently retrieve and organise relevant information to assist the Judge in arriving at a decision. In the course of that process, of course, the Judge may accept or reject the information that has been made available.

There are three utilities that have been made available to the Judiciary in this area:

1. A Sentencing Information System

2. The Judicial Workstation

3. Litigation support and Electronic Research Facilities

In the near future it is planned that the Sentencing System and the Electronic Research will be available on an Intranet network. The Judicial Workstation is a system of utilities that is installed upon a Judges own machine, although it is planned that documents created during a trial may be filed on a Local Area Network. I now shall describe these utilities in more detail.

At present an electronic Sentencing Digest is provided. This is maintained in Folio Views format and contains representative sentences for most offences, including a digest of the facts and the matters taken into account by the Judge. Thus, when the Judge consults the Digest he/she can set parameters on the search. The savings that were made in providing the Sentencing Digest in electronic rather than hard copy format had the result of freeing up funds for the development of a Penalty Guide which has been made available. This provides, electronically, information on the penalties that may be imposed for all crimes and other offences set out statutes and regulations in New Zealand.

The Sentencing Information that is provided is a step on the way to a sentencing database which will provide statistical information on sentences imposed for various offences, factoring in various parameters for aggravation or mitigation. The new system, currently being developed by the Department for Courts, should be available next year.

At the moment Judges of the High Court have their own associates who attend to various aspects of the Judge’s work including typing. In the District Court typing services are provided by secretaries or from the typing pool in smaller court locations. The provision of computers with a word processing program envisaged a quicker production of decisions by allowing judges to edit their own work on computer rather than returning handwritten amendments to hard copy to the typist or associate and having the whole decision retyped and sent back. Nevertheless a number of Judges do in fact type their own decisions. They have the advantage of advanced keyboard skills, which is not to attributed to nor sought from all the judiciary.

The preparation of decisions has been facilitated by a suite of word processing utilities using macros which, together with a database library of a judge’s decisions, form what we have named the Judicial Workstation or JWS.

JWS is a tool used to manage all the Judge’s documentation about a case. It is based on workspaces. Workspaces are logical spaces in which work is done. It is rather like a file. The workspace acts as a container for documents providing secure storage and providing the ability to distribute documents. In particular the JWS:

In future the JWS will have expanded uses.

The suite of utilities comprise a number of documents that can assist in the preparation of a decision.

When the case has been completed, all the decisions which the Judge wishes to keep may be filed in a database which can be searched by casename or by keytitle, subtitle or catchphrase references. The results of the database search allow the Judge, by way of DDE link, to call up the decision which is stored in his or her library.

For long and complex trials the Justice Department and its successor, the Department for Courts has provided specialised software and computer equipment. For a complex criminal fraud trial, expected to last a number of months and which had a large number of documents, a specialised imaging system was devised. All the documents were scanned into the system and could thereafter be easily recalled and displayed on computer monitors to the witness and to all counsel as well as the Judge. The Department for Courts has also provided a number of copies of a program known as Ready for Trial for complex civil cases.

The research capabilities of the computer have long been attractive to the Judiciary. Access to databases such as Lexis is not provided because of cost, but there are a number of other research facilities that have been trialed. Research databases known as Briefcase and Linx are available, providing information on recent cases in New Zealand. Copies of electronic texts and statutes are also available and are being tested by Judges’ Research Counsel. In addition, Internet access has been made available as a part of the trial. It is to be hoped that the utility of these resources will be proven and that they will become available to the Judiciary and Research Counsel on Local Area Network servers.

Electronic Case Management has made an appearance within the Court Administration. However, the Judge is not involved electronically although he or she has the potential for involvement and this will probably change in the future. If Judges presently track the cases which are assigned to them (and that is not usual in our system) the systems they have set up are personal.

In the budget last year the Government made a substantial commitment to updating Information Technology systems in the New Zealand Courts. Caseflow management systems will streamline many of the manual processes, improve workflows and capture data for future planning. The Judiciary will also be beneficiaries of these changes. The new facilities which will be provided are known as the Judicial Information Research and Resources.

A new Sentencing Information System is in presently being developed and will contain similar information to that available in New South Wales. In addition, access to specific sentencing information and guideline judgments will be available.

The Judicial Workstation is to be completely reworked. The essentials of the litigation support tools will remain but the underlying programming will be altered to make it compatible with the Windows 95\NT 32 bit environment and the front-end of the system will be provided by Internet Explorer utilising HTML.

The personal libraries maintained by Judges will still be present but will use a different means of searching. Filing will still be based on keytitles. There will be improved and more sophisticated searching capabilities.

There will be provision for decisions to be distributed to the Intranet environment, thus making those decisions electronically available to all Judges throughout the country. The ability will exist to obtain a decision on a point, say, from Dunedin without making a request of the Judge or a telephone call or a FAX for a copy. Availability of decisions will, of course, be subject to whatever distribution limitations the Judge may have imposed.

Electronic Libraries will be provided to the Judiciary. It is envisaged that electronic texts will be available on LAN’s and will be available for Judicial access. Depending upon security it may well be that access to electronic libraries will be available from remote locations.

A major review of evidence recording systems is being carried out to determine efficient, appropriate and cost-effective solutions to recording evidence in hearings. At the moment it is envisaged that there will be a mix of solutions provided.

The Judiciary will be beneficiaries of some of the larger administrative IT changes proposed by the Department. Courts will be linked by wide area networks and an Intranet, thus enabling more efficient information sharing. In addition, Internet access is planned once security issues have been resolved.

It can safely be said that the goals of the Judges in 1990 have been met. Over the last eight years a large number technological advances in both hardware and software and the wider availability of legal information on the internet have given fresh perspectives to the way in which technology can assist Judges in their decision making process and determinations. There is a recognition of the inevitability of the presence of Information Technology in the judicial process. At the same time there is, on the part of some, a reluctance to embrace it with open arms. This reticence is understandable and perhaps warranted. A recent power blackout in the central business district of Auckland City, which brought business and commercial activity to its knees and the impact of which is still being felt, demonstrates the fragility of an over-reliance upon a pervasive technology to the exclusion of traditional methods of work. As long was we recognise that Information Technology is but a tool, one of many on the Judicial belt, and that it does not become or replace the process, it will have an important role to play in the provision of information necessary to assist judges in coming to their decisions.