With judiciary embracing technology, time to push dispute resolution online

Experts say online dispute resolution cannot take off in India without active work from the government and the judiciary

online dispute resolution
Experts say one area that could see huge uptake is the demand for online dispute resolution
Akanshha Agrawal,
4 min read Last Updated : Mar 29 2020 | 8:58 PM IST

Don't want to miss the best from Business Standard?

In the light of the pandemic-induced lockdown, the Supreme Court recently announced hearings would now take place in urgent matters through video conferencing. Legal experts see this as a spark that could usher in a large-scale infusion of technology in the justice system — a silver lining to the ominous Covid-19 pandemic cloud.  

Way back in 2005, an e-Committee established by the Supreme Court for planning the implementation of information and communication technology (ICT) in the judiciary recognised an “urgent need of re-engineering” of the judicial processes and ICT enablement as “mission-critical”. However, a decade and a half later, much of this still remains work-in-progress.

Experts say one area that could see huge uptake is the demand for online dispute resolution (ODR), which would include the judiciary as well as the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) by parties going fully online.

Deepika Kihnal, who leads the judicial reforms team at Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, is confident that the Covid-19 crisis is going to force a change in the way people look at ODR. “The legal sector is finally forced to adopt technology. With the sector embracing technology, it is only a matter of time before disputes start getting resolved online,” says Kihnal. She thinks this will lead to a rise in online ADR mechanisms, followed by court-annexed ODR.

 

 
Kanchan Gupta, co-founder of Centre for Alternate Dispute Resolution Excellence, which is working to provide a private online platform, is already seeing an increased level of interest from clients, following the closing down of courts.

Experts say ODR cannot take off in India without active work from the government and the judiciary. “It is important the judiciary’s digitisation plans enable all stakeholders in the justice system to exchange information digitally. This is best achieved by building a justice platform on open standards and modular principles,” says Surya Prakash, fellow and programme director at DAKSH.

Prakash believes while the government should work actively to take the judiciary online, it should be wary of engaging with the ADR system and allow the sector to evolve by itself.
 
Recognising that this cannot function in a regulatory vacuum, he suggests the government could explore the possibility of eADR modules. “The recently formed Arbitration Council of India could act as a standard-setting body from a technology perspective to encourage institutional arbitration.” 

Several private ODR platforms have also emerged in India in recent years. Kinhal, who also works as policy consultant for one such platform, argues the government will be required to work in unison with private entities. “The judiciary is already buckling under the existing burden. The only way to resolve new-age disputes, especially the post-COVID disputes, in a timely manner, is if they are routed to ODR platforms.” 

Following the international regime, the government could help eradicate the concerns related to ODR platforms, such as the ability to provide unbiased and fair dispute resolution, data protection, privacy and most significantly, the enforceability of awards, say experts. “To build the public’s trust and confidence in ODR platforms, the government needs to issue guidelines on the minimal standards of fairness and data protection that these platforms need to adhere to. As for the judiciary’s ODR capability, the government needs to provide sufficient funds and expertise to help phased adoption of ODR,” says Kihnal.

Gupta points out though the law allows ODR mechanisms and gives freedom to arbitrators to take the resolution process online, the biggest hurdle is lack of awareness. Experts suggest the government publish a list of approved institutions and push for a policy shift requiring civil disputes to first go through an ADR process.

One subscription. Two world-class reads.

Already subscribed? Log in

Subscribe to read the full story →
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

Topics :CoronavirusLockdownIndian JudiciarySupreme Court

Next Story