Digital Transformation of Alternative Dispute Resolution

Today, in Russia and in the world, the workload on judges is growing, which affects the quality of legal proceedings. Due attention is not given to solving this problem, although its consequences may negatively affect the formation of the information society and the development of the digital economy. The workload per employee in some regional courts does not allow us to expect the quality of the administration of justice. So far, the problem has been local in nature, but the study made it possible to predict that in the near future the workload on all judges may begin to grow at a more significant pace. This will be facilitated by the development of the electronic justice system and the evolution of LawTech. Today, no more than half of social disputes come before the court. The development of information technologies in legal proceedings may motivate persons who have previously avoided the courts to apply to the state for dispute resolution. This process is already being observed in some countries.

Identifying the risk of overloading the judicial system requires finding ways to eliminate it. One of the most promising is the digital transformation of the alternative dispute resolution system (ADR). Today in Russia, the ADR is not of a mass nature, which means that the assistance from it to the judiciary is insignificant. The introduction of «end-to-end» digital technologies can significantly increase its efficiency. The analysis of foreign experience allowed us to identify variants of the digital evolution of the ADR. On its basis, it is proposed to form a domestic system of digital dispute resolution, which will not replace, but will protect the existing judicial system from overload. For this purpose, the creation of several innovative legal structures is justified: the rejection of artificial intelligence in court proceedings, the approval of the rule «first ADR», the introduction of Process Mining as a kind of ADR, the creation of temporary ADR algorithms, the introduction of ADR in social media.

1. Evsikov KS. Mekhanizmy realizatsii konstitutsionnogo prava grazhdan na uchastie v upravlenii delami gosudarstva [Mechanisms of realization of the constitutional right of citizens to participate in the state affairs administration]. Zhurnal Rossiyskogo Prava [Journal of Russian Law]. 2019;6:36-42. (In Russ.).

2. Minbaleev AV, Berestnev MA, Evsikov KS. Regulirovanie ispolzovaniya iskusstvennogo intellekta v dobyvayushchey promyshlennosti [Regulation of the use of artificial intelligence in the extractive industry]. Izvestiya Tulskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Nauki o zemle [Proceedings of the TSU. Geoscience]. 2022;2:509-525. (In Russ.).

3. Minbaleev AV, Evsikov KS Informatsionnye tekhnologii protivodeystviya korruptsii [Information anti-corruption technologies]. Zhurnal Sibirskogo federalnogo universiteta. Gumanitarnye nauki [Journal of the Siberian Federal University. The Humanities]. 2021;14(11):1674-1689. (In Russ.).

4. Polyakova TA, Minbaleev AV. Ponyatie i pravovaya priroda «tsifrovoy zrelosti» [The concept and legal nature of «digital maturity»]. Gosudarstvo i Pravo [State and Law]. 2021;9:107-116. (In Russ.).

5. De Elizalde F. LegalTech in Consumer Relations and Small-Value Claims: A Survey. In: DiMatteo L, Janssen A, Ortolani P, De Elizalde F, Cannarsa M, Durovic M, editors. The Cambridge Handbook of Lawyering in the Digital Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2021. DOI: 10.1017/9781108936040.013.

6. Harshita A, Sen P. Social Media-Tion: A Constructive Approach to Dispute Resolution? Revista Brasileira De Alternative Dispute Resolution. 2021;3(6):131-145. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.52028/rbadr.v3i6.7.

7. Kasim Fajri M, Abidin Nurdin. Study of Sociological Law on Conflict Resolution through Adat in Aceh Community According to Islamic Law. Samarah: Jurnal Hukum Keluarga dan Hukum Islam. 2020;4(2):375-397. DOI: 10.22373/sjhk.v4i2.8231.

8. Maru V. Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment: A Review of World Bank Practice. Justice and development working paper series. № 9. World Bank, Washington, DC; 2009. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/18102.

9. Minbaleev AV, Evsikov KS. Alternative dispute resolution in digital government. RBADR — Revista Brasileira De Alternative Dispute Resolution. 2022; 4(7):119-146. DOI: 10.52028/rbadr.v4i7.8.

10. Morris GH, Alexander K. Inclusiveness or Tokenism? Culture and Mediation in New Zealand’s Dispute Resolution Statutory Regimes. ADRJ. 2017;28:170. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=303880.

11. Ramseyer JM. Social capital and the formal legal system: Evidence from prefecture-level data in Japan. Journal of Legal Analysis. 2015;7(2):421-466. Available at: https://doi.org10.1093jlalav008.