Implementation of Judiciary Information Systems Strategy Phase II

---

PURPOSE
INTRODUCTION
PROPOSAL
JUSTIFICATION
BENEFITS
COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Original Scope of Judiciary Information Information Systems Strategy -- Objectives of Individual Phases
Judiciary Information Systems Strategy - Major Projects in Each Phase
Summary of the key component systems of Judiciary Information Systems Strategy Phase II)
Expected Improvements In Service Brought About By The Judiciary Information Systems Strategy Phase II
Cost Benefit Analysis of the proposed Judiciary Information Systems Strategy Plan (Phase II) (at 1996-97 prices)

---

PURPOSE

This information paper outlines the funding proposal for the Judiciary Information Systems Strategy Phase II Computerisation Project.

INTRODUCTION

2.The Judiciary has made comparatively little use of information technology in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Family Court, all of which are accommodated in the Supreme Court building. This has inhibited its efficiency and productivity, and reduced its ability to deal with the increased volume and complexity of work.

PROPOSAL

3. The Judiciary Administrator (JA), with the support of the Director of Information Technology Services (DITS), proposes to implement Phase II of the Judiciary Information Systems Strategy (JISS).

JUSTIFICATION

4. JISS is a three-phased development programme to facilitate the Judiciary’s use of information technology to maximise management efficiency and enhance standards of service to the public. The original scope of Phase I to III is at Enclosure 1. Following the full implementation of Phase I in November 1995, which has greatly enhanced the operations of the District Court, the Small Claims Tribunal and the Probate Registry, we propose to implement Phase II with the following modifications to its original scope to meet operational needs -

1. deferring automation of the Labour Tribunal to Phase III to allow time to finalise a review of its operations;
2. extending electronic access to legal reference to all judicial personnel within the Judiciary;
3. advancing Jury management to Phase II as the existing computer system is close to capacity; and
4. including automation of operational and human resources management.

The key component systems for Phase II are summarised at Enclosure 2. We set out the major improvements in the following paragraphs.

5. Co-ordination and Monitoring. The smooth operation of the courts relies on an effective and efficient mechanism to monitor case progress and co-ordinate court support services. The existing manual system provides no overall monitoring and control. Currently, information circulation is slow, error-prone, and often untimely for good decision making. This has resulted in mis-communication, confusion, errors and even adjournments of hearings. Such incidents not only waste court time and cause inconvenience to the public and the legal profession, but also seriously damage the image of the Judiciary. In JISS Phase II we shall adopt an integrated approach to case management by maintaining in a central database both the case progress and information on the requirement of physical and human resources for each case i.e. courtroom, judge, jurors, and court support staff such as interpreters and bailiffs. This central database would then enable the Judiciary to monitor any changes in case status or resource availability in an integrated manner, and to immediately notify such changes to the appropriate parties so that they may take action to avoid wasting court time and resources.

6. Listing. The computer assisted listing system introduced at the District Court in JISS Phase I is a valuable tool in the tracking of court availability, the monitoring of case readiness, and compilation of the daily cause lists. It also provides useful management information to assist with operational planning for the courts. We shall introduce a similar computer assisted listing system to the High Court, and enhance the system to support cross checking with the lower court’s diaries during the scheduling of hearings. The system can detect any conflict or cross booking for the same case or same party and notify the listing officers to effect the necessary re-scheduling.

7. Document Submission. Presently, the Judiciary dedicates each counter at the Supreme Court Registry to the filing and processing of specific types of document or action. This has resulted in prolonged queuing times and inefficient use of manpower. We shall introduce electronic cause books and registers to be shared by all counters and install a multi-functional workstation at each counter to provide ‘one-stop shop service’ to court users. Customers need only to queue once to submit applications/documents for filing. We expect to reduce the queuing time from 30 minutes to 15 minutes during peak hours.

8. Public Enquiries. The Judiciary arranges information in the existing manual cause books and registers by case number sequence only. Searching through these cause books and registers is difficult and time consuming if the case number is not known. We shall provide workstations at both the Supreme Court Registry and the Family Court Registry to facilitate public search using new electronic cause books and registers. In addition to case number, customers can also use the party’s name, in either English or Chinese, in their search. We expect to reduce searching time markedly from the existing average of one hour to less than 5 minutes. We shall reduce the waiting time to obtain a sealed copy of a recent Decree Absolute or Decree Nisi from 30 minutes to 3 minutes as we shall be able to generate these documents automatically by the system.

9. Information Flow. We shall enhance all existing networks and integrate them into a Judiciary-wide network that connects all Judiciary premises to improve the information flow. Typical examples are -

1. At present it might require up to one day for incoming documents at the registries to reach the judges’ clerks. The new system would make available to the judges’ clerks all essential document information immediately upon their entry at the registries. For any urgent document received at the registries, the system will immediately send a message to alert the judge’s clerk.
2. Presently the Judiciary takes about 10 days to notify the Bailiff’s Office, Accounts Office and registries of the Courts’ orders on bankruptcy and company winding up cases. This lengthy process caused several incidents of errors in releasing money to the wrong parties and necessitated the taking of protracted procedures by the Official Receiver to recover the money. With computerisation, the Judiciary can make available orders on such matters immediately to all concerned parties.
3. Under the new system, the Judiciary can link bail applications initiated as High Court Miscellaneous Proceeding cases to the original case records, making the results immediately available to all concerned parties. Similarly, the Judiciary can immediately pass appeal results to the original case record system maintained at the lower courts.
4. Under the new system, the Judiciary will be able to notify the Correctional Services Department of body order requirements two to three days earlier to aid the transfer of prisoners to court.
5. The system will automatically generate memoranda, notices and ex-parte application results and fax them to the Attorney General’s Chambers, the Legal Aid Department, and also to the solicitor firms wherever possible.

10. Human Resources Management. We need to create a personnel information database that contains basic personal particulars, skill and experience profiles, training records, leave records and posting history for all Judiciary staff. In addition to the automation of record management at the Personnel Registry, the system shall assist heads of grades in planning staff development, training and staff movements. The system will also automatically reflect approved leave applications in the respective officer’s electronic diary to eliminate the existing problem of inconsistencies found in the manual diaries. The system will also provide a more effective means of staff deployment. Examples are -

1. Court Interpreters

   Whenever there are requests for special language/dialect skills, the system shall scan the skill profiles and diaries of the existing interpreters to identify suitable candidates for deployment before searching for freelance interpreters. As for the hire of freelance interpreters, the system automatically identifies a list of suitable candidates for selection by the Interpreter’s Office.

2. Bailiffs

   The system shall sort the summonses/writs according to the ‘district’ and ‘hearing date’ sequence so that the same bailiff can undertake summonses/writs to be executed in the same geographical areas with the appropriate priority. This system shall also keep track of execution progress and assist bailiffs with the calculation of execution fees.

11. Jury. The Judiciary will enlarge the potential juror database to handle an increase in the number of potential jurors. The system shall also enable random selection of jurors based on their language proficiency.

12. Legal Reference. The Judiciary shall maintain an up-to-date electronic legal reference database to assist judges in research. The Judiciary will also be able to make judgments available to all judges and judicial officers within three days once they are handed down, instead of the existing lead time of up to seven or eight weeks for the lower courts. The Judiciary shall install workstations with powerful full text search capabilities at the Supreme Court Library to replace the existing practice of using index cards, which only supports the use of case number in the search. We shall acquire electronic publications of major legal reference material on CD Rom’s and make them available to all judges and judicial officers via the communications network.

BENEFITS

13. Overall, the proposal shall improve the operational efficiency of the Judiciary and its services to the public. A summary of the efficiency improvements that are able to be quantified at this stage is at Enclosure 3.

14. One of the objectives of JISS Phase II is to introduce an effective co-ordination and monitoring mechanism that ensures smooth court operations and avoids any unnecessary adjournment of hearings. The anticipated overall savings should be substantial considering the saving of court time and resources and the corresponding savings at the Attorney General’s Chambers, at the Legal Aid Department, at the law enforcement departments, as well as the public who serve as witnesses and jurors.

15. Realisable staff cost savings of $4,948,000 shall arise from the deletion of 17 departmental/clerical graded posts. Notional staff cost savings valued at $9,396,000 annually is the aggregate of task savings across 296 posts in the Judiciary. These notional savings are derived from the elimination of repeated transcription of case information, replacement of typing work by the automatic generation of documents, information retrieval improvements, better file tracking, and automatic generation of statistics.

16. The new system shall also achieve staff cost avoidance amounting to $9,154,000 per annum, which would otherwise be required for the -

1. provision of bilingual support to the existing juror management system, cause books, registers and court documents, which are anticipated with the greater use of Chinese at the High Court;
2. generation of additional management information to assist with the development of judicial changes and administration planning and control; and the
3. proper keeping of the manual cause books, registers and file movement logs.

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS

17. A cost-benefit analysis of JISS Phase II is at Enclosure 4. Taking the realisable and notional staff cost savings, together with staff cost avoidance, the break-even point for the investment shall occur in the fifth year after implementation.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

18. The total non-recurrent cost for implementing the JISS Phase II is estimated to be $74,168,000. The cost breakdowns are as follows -

19. The recurrent expenditure and costs are estimated as follows -

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

20. The plan is to implement JISS Phase II by adopting a phased delivery approach of the major system functions in accordance with the following timetable -

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

21. In 1991 the Judiciary commissioned a consultancy study to advise on areas where the application of information technology can bring about improvements in service and efficiency and to recommend a strategy for implementation. The study was completed in mid 1992. The consultants proposed the provision of information technology support to all the main operational functions of the Judiciary on a phased basis.

22. Funding for Phase I of the implementation plan for JISS was approved by Finance Committee on 10 June 1994. Implementation was successfully completed on schedule in November 1995. It has achieved its objectives in providing improved services to the public, increased the handling capacities, reduced court waiting times and improved operational efficiency at the District Court, Small Claims Tribunal and Probate Registry.

Judiciary Administrator’s Office
27 November 1996

---

Enclosure 1 - page 1 of 2

Original Scope of Judiciary Information Information Systems Strategy -- Objectives of Individual Phases

Judiciary Information Systems Strategy - Major Projects in Each Phase

---

Enclosure 2

Summary of the key component systems of Judiciary Information Systems Strategy Phase II)

The major functions of the key component systems are -

1. Case Management and Listing for High Court, Court of Appeal and Family Court
   capture and maintain the essential case information;
   provide computer assisted listing and integrated electronic diary for judges/judicial officers, courtrooms and court support services;
   monitor the availability and utilisation of judges/judicial officers, courtrooms, court support services;
   generate cause lists and court documents;
   provide case tracking, file tracking and document tracking;
   answer enquiries;
   provide management information and statistics.
   

2. Jury Management
   maintain the potential jurors database;
   provide random selection of jurors;
   generate summonses and letters;
   monitor the jury service against case progress.
   

3. Bailiff Service Management
   monitor service requests and execution results against case progress;
   assist task assignment and staff deployment.

4. Interpreter Service Management
   monitor service requests and availability against case progress;
   assist task assignment and staff deployment.

5. Personnel Management
   maintain staff particulars, skill/experience profiles, training records, leave records and posting history;
   provide leave management and integrate staff availability with electronic court diary.

6. Electronic Legal Reference Database
   maintain a centralised electronic legal reference database which covers internal practice directions, guidelines, judgments and electronic publications of major legal reference materials on CD Rom’s;
   provide gateway to access external law databases.

7. Office Automation
   provide standard Government OA facilities such as electronic mail, word processor, fax facility and scheduler;
   cover (i) all judges/judicial officers and their judicial clerks; (ii) officers at MPS 45 or above, and their secretaries/assistants; and also (iii) heads of functional units.

   ---

   Enclosure 3

   Expected Improvements In Service Brought About By The Judiciary Information Systems Strategy Phase II

   Improvement Area	Existing Performance	Improved Performance
   Supreme Court Registry Counter queuing time for document submission Cause book search time Party’s request to access court file	30 minutes (at peak hour) 1 hour 25 visits per week cannot be entertained due to files cannot be located	15 minutes (at peak hour) Within 5 minutes File location automatically tracked, save 25 re-visits per week
   Family Court Registry Waiting time for a search of the Decree Absolute Register Decree Absolute Register search time Obtain Decree Absolute sealed copy Obtain Decree Nisi sealed copy	1 week 1 hour 30 minutes 30 minutes	No waiting time Within 5 minutes 3 minutes 3 minutes
   Judge’s Clerk Essential case information of in-coming documents Notification of urgent submissions	1 day(until the paper documents reach the judge’s clerk) No	immeidately available once data entered at the registry. Immediately notified.
   Bailiff and Other Registries Bankruptcy and company winding up information	10 days	immediately notified once hearing results entered to the system
   Correctional Services Department Body Order Information to reach CSD	2-3 days	immediately available to CSD’s office at Supreme Court Building
   Judges/Judicial Officers Circulation of judgments	up to 7-8 weeks	within 3 days

   ---

   Enclosure 4

   Cost Benefit Analysis of the proposed Judiciary Information Systems Strategy Plan (Phase II) (at 1996-97 prices)

   								($'000)
   				1996/97	1997/98	1998/99	1999/2000	2000/01	2001/02	2002/03	2003/04
   Costs
   Non-recurrent
   - expenditure				933	45,540	15,622
   - staff costs				2,290	8,296	1,487
   Sub-total				3,223	53,836	17,109
   Recurrent
   - expenditure			-		378	4,170	4,824	4,824	4,824	5,922	5,922
   - staff costs				-	-	4,039	4,678	4,678	4,678	4,678	4,678
   Sub-total				-	378	8,209	9,502	9,502	9,502	10,600	10,600
   Total Costs				3,223	54,214	25,318	9,502	9,502	9,502	10,600	10,600
   Benefits
   Realizable saving in staff costs				-	-	2,474	4,948	4,948	4,948	4,948	4,948
   Notional benefits in staff savings				-	-	7,047	9,396	9,396	9,396	9,396	9,396
   Staff cost avoidance				-	-	9,154	9,154	9,154	9,154	9,154	9,154
   Total Benefits				-	-	18,675	23,498	23,498	23,498	23,498	23,498
   Net benefits				(3,223)	(54,214)	(6,643)	13,996	13,996	13,996	12,898	12,898
   Cumulative benefits				(3,223)	(57,437)	(64,080)	(50,084)	(36,088)	(22,092)	(9,194)	3,704

   ---

   Last Updated on {{PUBLISH AUTO[[DATE("d mmm, yyyy")]]}}