Washington State
               Access to Justice Technology Principles

These Access to Justice Technology Principles were developed by the Access
to Justice Board to assure that technology enhances rather than diminishes
access to and the quality of justice for all persons in Washington State.
Comments of the Access to Justice Board committee drafters accompanying
the Principles make clear the intent that the Principles are to be used so
as to be practical and effective for both the workers in and users of the
justice system, that the Principles do not create or constitute the basis
for new causes of action or create unfunded mandates.  These Principles
have been endorsed by the Board for Judicial Administration, the Judicial
Information System Committee, the Board of Trustees of the Superior Court
Judges’ Association, the Board of Trustees of the District and Municipal
Court Judges’ Association, the Board of Governors of the Washington State
Bar Association, the Minority and Justice Commission, the Gender and Justice
Commission, the Attorney General, and the Council on Public Legal Education.

Preamble

The use of technologies in the Washington State justice system must protect
and advance the fundamental right of equal access to justice.  There is a
particular need to avoid creating or increasing barriers to access and to
reduce or remove existing barriers for those who are or may be excluded or
underserved, including those not represented by counsel.

This statement presumes a broad definition of access to justice, which includes
the meaningful opportunity, directly or through other persons: (1) to assert a
claim or defense and to create, enforce, modify, or discharge a legal obligation
in any forum; (2) to acquire the procedural or other information necessary (a)
to assert a claim or defense, or (b) to create, enforce, modify, or discharge
an obligation in any forum, or (c) to otherwise improve the likelihood of a just
result; (3) to participate in the conduct of proceedings as witness or juror;
and (4) to acquire information about the activities of courts or other dispute
resolution bodies.  Further, access to justice requires a just process, which
includes, among other things, timeliness and affordability.  A just process also
has "transparency," which means that the system allows the public to
see not just the outside but through to the inside of the justice system, its rules
and standards, procedures and processes, and its other operationalcharacteristics
and patterns so as to evaluate all aspects of its operations, particularly its
fairness, effectiveness, and efficiency.

Therefore, these Access to Justice Technology Principles state the governing
values and principles which shall guide the use of technology in the Washington
State justice system.

Comment to "Preamble"

Access to justice is a fundamental right in Washington State, and the State Supreme
Court has recognized and endeavored to protect that right in its establishment of
the Access to Justice Board.  From an understanding that technology can affect
access to justice, these Access to Justice Technology Principles are intended to
provide general statements of broad applicability and a foundation for resolving
specific issues as they arise.  The various parts of this document should be read
as a whole.

A broad definition of the terms used herein is necessary to ensure that our
underlying constitutional and common law values are fully protected.  The terms
used in this document should be understood and interpreted in that light.

These Principles do not mandate new expenditures, create new causes of action,
or repeal or modify any rule.  Rather, they require that justice system decision
makers consider access to justice, take certain steps whenever technology that
 may affect access to justice is planned or implemented, avoid reducing access,
and, whenever possible, use technology to enhance access to justice.

Scope

The Access to Justice Technology Principles apply to all courts of law, all clerks
of court and court administrators, and to all other persons or parts of the
Washington justice system under the rule-making authority of the Court.  They
should also serve as a guide for all other actors in the Washington justice system.

"Other actors in the Washington justice system" means all governmental and
non-governmental bodies engaged in formal dispute resolution or rulemaking and
all persons and entities who may represent, assist, or provide information to
persons who come before such bodies.

"Technology" includes all electronic means of communication and transmission and
all mechanisms and means used for the production, storage, retrieval, aggregation,
transmission, communication, dissemination, interpretation, presentation, or
application of information.

Comment to "Scope"

This language is intended to make clear that the Access to Justice Technology
Principles are mandatory only for those persons or bodies within the scope of the
State Supreme Court's rulemaking authority.  It is, however, hoped and urged that
these Principles and their values will be applied and used widely throughout
the entire justice system.

It is also intended that the Access to Justice Technology Principles shall
continue to apply fully in the event all or any portion of the performance,
implementation, or accomplishment of a duty, obligation, responsibility,
enterprise, or task is delegated, contracted, assigned, or transferred to
another entity or person, public or private, to whom the Principles may not
otherwise apply.

The definition of the word "technology" is meant to be inclusive rather
than exclusive.

1.  Requirement of Access to Justice

Access to a just result requires access to the justice system.  Use of technology
in the justice system should serve to promote equal access to justice and to
promote the opportunity for equal participation in the justice system for all.
Introduction of technology or changes in the use of technology must not reduce
access or participation and, whenever possible, shall advance such
access and participation.

Comment to "Requirement of Access to Justice"

This Principle combines promotion of access to justice through technology with
a recognition of the "first, do no harm" precept.  The intent is to promote the
use of technology to advance access whenever possible, to maintain a focus on
the feasible while protecting against derogation of access, and to encourage
progress, innovation, and experimentation.

2.  Technology and Just Results

The overriding objective of the justice system is a just
result achieved through a just process by impartial and well-informed decision
makers. The justice system shall use and advance technology to achieve that
objective and shall reject, minimize, or modify any use that reduces the likelihood
of achieving that objective.


Comment to "Technology and Just Results"

The reference to a "just process" reaffirms that a just process is integral to
a just result.  The reference to "well-informed decision makers" is to emphasize
the potential role of technology in gathering, organizing, and presenting
information in order that the decision maker receives the optimal amount
and quality of information so that the possibility of a just result is maximized.

3.  Openness and Privacy

The justice system has the dual responsibility of being open to the public and
protecting personal privacy.  Its technology should be designed and used to meet
both responsibilities.


Technology use may create or magnify conflict between values of openness and
personal privacy.  In such circumstances, decision makers must engage in a
careful balancing process, considering both values and their underlying purposes,
and should maximize beneficial effects while minimizing detrimental effects.

Comment to "Openness and Privacy"

This Principle underlines that the values of openness and privacy are not necessarily
in conflict, particularly when technology is designed and used in a way that is
crafted to best protect and, whenever possible, enhance each value.  However,
when a conflict is unavoidable, it is essential to consider the technology's
effects on both privacy and openness. The Principle requires that decision makers
engage in a balancing process which carefully considers both values and their
underlying rationales and objectives, weighs the technology's potential effects,
and proceed with use when they determine that the beneficial effects outweigh
the detrimental effects.


The Principle applies both to the content of the justice system and its operations,
as well as the requirements for accountability and transparency.  These
requirements may mean different things depending on whether technology use
involves internal court operations or involves access to and use of the justice
system by members of the public.

4. Assuring a Neutral Forum

The existence of a neutral, accessible, and transparent forum for dispute resolution
is fundamental to the Washington State justice system.  Developments in technology
may generate alternative dispute resolution systems that do not have these
characteristics, but which, nevertheless, attract users who seek the advantages
of available technology.  Participants and actors in the Washington State justice
system shall use all appropriate means to ensure the existence of neutral, accessible,
and transparent forums which are compatible with new technologies and to discourage
and reduce the demand for the use of forums which do not meet the basic
requirements of neutrality, accessibility, and transparency.

Comment to "Assuring a Neutral Forum"

Technologically generated alternative dispute resolution (including online dispute
resolution) is a rapidly growing field that raises many issues for the justice
system.  This Principle underlines the importance of applying the basic values
and requirements of the justice system and all the Access to Justice Technology
Principles to that area, while clarifying that there is no change to governing law.

This Principle is not intended in any way to discourage the accessibility and use
of mediation, in which the confidentiality of the proceeding and statements and
discussions may assist the parties in reaching a settlement; provided that the
parties maintain access to a neutral and transparent forum in the event a settlement
is not reached.

5.  Maximizing Public Awareness and Use

Access to justice requires that the public have available understandable information
about the justice system, its resources, and means of access.  The justice system
should promote ongoing public knowledge and understanding of the tools afforded by
technology to access justice by developing and disseminating information and materials
 as broadly as possible in forms and by means that can reach the largest possible
number and variety of people.

Comment to "Maximizing Public Awareness and Use"

While assuring public awareness and understanding of relevant access to justice
technologies is an affirmative general duty of all governmental branches, this
Principle expressly recognizes that the primary responsibility lies with the
justice system itself.  As stated in the Comment to the Preamble, none of these
Access to Justice Technology Principles, including this one, mandates new expenditures
or creates new causes of action.  At the same time, however, planners and decision
makers must demonstrate sensitivity to the needs, capacities, and where appropriate,
limitations of prospective users of the justice system.

Communicating the tools of access to the public should be done by whatever means
is effective.  For example, information about kiosks where domestic violence
protection forms can be filled out and filed electronically could be described
on radio or television public service announcements.   Another example might be
providing information on handouts or posters at libraries or community centers.
Information could also be posted on a website of the Council for Public Legal
Education or of a local or statewide legal aid program, using an audible web
reader for persons with visual or literacy limitations. The means may be as many
and varied as people’s imaginations and the characteristics of the broad
population to be reached.

6.  Best Practices

To ensure implementation of the Access to Justice Technology Principles, those
governed by these principles shall utilize "best practices" procedures or standards.
Other actors in the justice system are encouraged to utilize or be guided by such
 best practices procedures or standards.

The best practices shall guide the use of technology so as to protect and enhance
access to justice and promote equality of access and fairness. Best practices shall
also provide for an effective, regular means of evaluation of the use of technology
in light of all the values and objectives of these Principles.


Comment to "Best Practices"

This Principle is intended to provide guidance to ensure that the broad values
and approaches articulated elsewhere in these Access to Justice Technology
Principles are implemented to the fullest extent possible in the daily reality
of the justice system and the people served by the justice system.  The intent
is that high quality practical tools and resources be available for consideration,
 use, evaluation, and improvement of technologies in all parts of the justice
system.  This Principle and these Access to Justice Technology Principles as a
whole are intended to encourage progress, innovation, and experimentation with
the objective of increasing meaningful access to quality justice for all.  With
these goals in mind, the development and adoption of statewide models for best
practices is strongly encouraged.