The Digital Transformation of Justice in the EU: Imperatives for Skills, Tools, and AI

Home » The Digital Transformation of Justice in the EU: Imperatives for Skills, Tools, and AI

The Digital Transformation of Justice in the EU: Imperatives for Skills, Tools, and AI

The European Union’s judicial systems are undergoing a profound digital transformation, a shift demanding enhanced digital literacy among all justice professionals and the careful integration of new technologies. However, current efforts reveal a significant gap in specialized digitalization and Artificial Intelligence (AI) training, alongside challenges in implementing EU-wide digital solutions and ethically deploying AI.

The Critical Need for Enhanced ICT Proficiency

The effective functioning of modern EU justice hinges on the digital competence of its judges, prosecutors, lawyers, and staff [I]. Yet, a stark reality emerges from recent data: in 2023, less than 5% of initial and continuing training for justice professionals focused on digitalization and AI [1]. This deficiency is compounded by a slight decrease in the overall number of trained professionals compared to 2022, with less than half of judges and prosecutors participating in any continuing EU law training [1]. This mirrors a broader EU trend where, in 2019, a third of the working-age population lacked basic digital skills [2].

The diversity of ICT solutions across Member States and differing legal traditions complicate efforts to standardize skills and training [3]. A concerning “knowing-doing-training” gap exists: while the necessity of digitalization is acknowledged (the “knowing”) and tools are being developed (the “doing”), the upskilling of professionals lags significantly. This can lead to inefficient technology use, cybersecurity risks, and ethical missteps, particularly with AI [Table 1, 3, 6, 7, 8]. Many court systems also lack in-house ICT development skills, leading to vendor dependency [3]. Furthermore, a “digital divide” within the judiciary itself risks creating operational inefficiencies and unequal access to justice [3, 5].

Recognizing this, the EU has launched initiatives like the European Judicial Training Strategy (2021-2024), prioritizing the digitalization of justice and targeting all professionals [8, 9]. The European Judicial Training Network (EJTN) and the Council of Europe’s CEPEJ are also key players, promoting digital integration and developing frameworks like the “Digital Competence Framework for Justice” [10, 11, 12, 8]. However, the fragmentation of training efforts and varying uptake across Member States hinder a unified approach [1].

Digital Tools: Reshaping EU Justice Systems

Digital tools are pivotal for enhancing the efficiency, accessibility, transparency, and cross-border cooperation of EU justice systems [II]. Platforms like e-CODEX (for secure cross-border data exchange) and the European e-Justice Portal (a multilingual information hub) are reshaping judicial workflows [13, 19, Table 2]. National case management systems are also crucial, though their sophistication varies [3].

However, implementation faces hurdles: ensuring interoperability between diverse national and EU systems, maintaining robust cybersecurity, adhering to data protection (GDPR), and bridging the digital divide to prevent exclusion [3, 6, 4, 23]. User adoption and comprehensive training are paramount [3, 8]. The discontinuation of the EU Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) platform due to extremely low consumer and trader uptake serves as a stark reminder of the “last mile” problem – the challenge of integrating EU-level tools with national realities and ensuring user engagement [32, 33]. Digitalization can also be a double-edged sword for court backlogs; without process re-engineering, it can introduce new complexities, as seen in some Dutch criminal cases [36, 41].

Experiences vary across Member States. Estonia is a leader in e-justice, with advanced systems enhancing efficiency and accessibility [40, 42]. The Netherlands has heavily invested in digitalizing its criminal justice system but faced challenges with case backlogs due to the complexities of digitizing extensive materials [36]. France has reported difficulties in its digital transformation, citing outdated hardware and software [41]. Italy’s “Processo Civile Telematico” shows advanced digitalization in civil procedure, though challenges in cybersecurity and digital literacy remain [48, 49].

Artificial Intelligence: Opportunities and Ethical Frontiers

AI offers transformative potential in legal research (e.g., Germany’s OLGA system), evidence analysis (e.g., Netherlands’ Hansken tool), predictive justice, and administrative automation [III, 54, 59, 23]. It promises enhanced efficiency, improved quality of justice, and better resource allocation [8, 28, 65].

The EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) provides a comprehensive regulatory framework, categorizing AI by risk [28, Table 3]. It prohibits certain AI practices (e.g., social scoring by public authorities, some forms of predictive policing based solely on profiling) and imposes stringent obligations on high-risk systems, common in justice (e.g., AI assisting judicial authorities in interpreting law or facts, AI for law enforcement risk assessment) [28]. These systems require robust risk management, data governance, transparency, human oversight, and conformity assessments [28]. National judicial authorities, however, retain the right to decide on AI adoption [28].

Profound ethical considerations persist. Algorithmic bias, stemming from biased training data, can perpetuate and amplify discrimination, as tragically highlighted by a Dutch tax authority algorithm that disproportionately accused families with immigrant backgrounds of fraud [23, 39, 77]. The “black box” nature of some AI undermines transparency and accountability [37]. Safeguarding fundamental rights—such as the right to a fair trial, presumption of innocence, and non-discrimination—is paramount [23, 37]. The CEPEJ’s Ethical Charter on AI use provides key principles, emphasizing human control and oversight [37]. The challenge lies in translating these principles and the AI Act’s requirements into consistent practice across diverse national contexts, avoiding a situation where AI merely makes an unjust system “efficiently unjust.”

Strategic Recommendations for a Digital Future

To successfully navigate this digital future, a concerted effort is needed:

-Strengthen ICT Training: Mandate comprehensive and continuous digital skills training, including AI literacy, for all judicial professionals. Develop and promote an EU-standardized “Digital Competence Framework for Justice Professionals” [1, 8].
-Foster User-Centric Digital Tools: Prioritize user-centric design and co-creation for digital tools, learning from failures like the ODR platform. Focus on interoperability standards (e.g., via e-CODEX) and conduct pre-implementation process reviews to avoid digitizing inefficiencies [33, 24, 36].
-Ensure Ethical AI Deployment: Mandate rigorous, independent audits and continuous monitoring of AI systems for bias and fundamental rights compliance. Invest in explainable AI (XAI) and establish clear protocols for human oversight, reinforcing judicial independence [38, 39]. National supervisory authorities for the AI Act need specialized expertise in justice applications [70].
-Promote EU-Wide Collaboration: Strengthen knowledge exchange hubs (e.g., e-Justice Portal, EJTN) and support cross-border pilot projects with robust evaluation. Actively address the digital divide to ensure equitable access to e-justice [10, 64, 5].
-Conclusion: Upholding Values in a Technological Landscape

The digital transformation of EU justice offers immense potential but requires overcoming significant hurdles, from skills gaps to ethical AI integration. Successfully navigating this path demands strategic investment in human capital and infrastructure, robust regulatory adherence, EU-wide collaboration, and an unwavering commitment to upholding core European values of justice, fairness, and the rule of law within an evolving technological landscape . The future efficacy and legitimacy of EU justice depend on managing these transformations effectively, ensuring technology serves justice, and justice serves all.

Article Provided by Athens Life Long Institute

References and Citations:

[1] Out now: 2024 Report on European Judicial Training – CEP Probation. (https://www.cep-probation.org/out-now-2024-report-on-european-judicial-training/)
[2] www.eca.europa.eu (Special Report 02/2021: EU actions and existing challenges on digital skills). (https://www.eca.europa.eu/lists/ecadocuments/rw21_02/rw_digital_skills_en.pdf)
[3] Seventh National Court Technology Conference ICT in European Justice Systems: Critical Issues and Trends. (https://ncsc.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/api/collection/tech/id/550/download)
[4] law.yale.edu (Sela Mösch Adijjani, The Digital Divide in Access to Justice). (https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/SELA15_Neptune_CV_Eng.pdf)
[5] www.europarl.europa.eu (IPOL_STU(2024)760277_EN.pdf, The digital divide and its impact on equal access to digital public services). (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2024/760277/IPOL_STU(2024)760277_EN.pdf)
[6] www.ccbe.eu (CCBE Guide on lawyers’ use of online legal platforms). (https://www.ccbe.eu/fileadmin/speciality_distribution/public/documents/DEONTOLOGY/DEON_Guides_recommendations/EN_DEON_20180629_CCBE-Guide-on-lawyers-use-of-online-legal-platforms.pdf)
[7] www.europarl.europa.eu (IPOL_STU(2024)762738_EN.pdf, Digitalisation of justice in the EU). (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2024/762738/IPOL_STU(2024)762738_EN.pdf)
[8] commission.europa.eu (Digitalisation of Justice 2023 Report). (https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/be9f8125-b561-4d06-accc-96312f0df0d2_en?filename=Digitalisation%20of%20Justice%202023_Rapport_interactive%20def%205.pdf)
[9] Training of justice professionals and training practices – European Commission. (https://commission.europa.eu/law/cross-border-cases/training-justice-professionals-and-training-practices_en)
[10] Building a common digital culture is a step towards the digital … – EJTN. (https://ejtn.eu/news/building-a-common-digital-culture-is-a-step-towards-the-digital-transformation-of-justice/)
[11] ejtn.eu (EJTN 2025 Training Catalogue). (https://ejtn.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/EJTN-2025-Training-Catalogue.pdf)
[12] CEPEJ: Action Plan on the Digitalisation of Justice – eucrim. (https://eucrim.eu/news/cepej-action-plan-on-the-digitalisation-of-justice/)
[13] inm-lex.ro (eFilit project, Agenda Cooperarea judiciara a UE in materie de familie…). (https://inm-lex.ro/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Agenda-Cooperarea-judiciara-a-UE-in-materie-de-familie-instrumente-digitale-disponibile-la-nivelul-UE-25-26-martie-2025.pdf)
[19] Training of justice professionals – European e-Justice Portal. (https://e-justice.europa.eu/120/EN/training_of_justice_professionals)
[23] eur-lex.europa.eu (OJ:C_202500437, Proposal for a Regulation on digitalisation of judicial cooperation). (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:C_202500437)
[24] European e-Justice Strategy 2024-2028 – EAPIL. (https://eapil.org/2025/02/05/european-e-justice-strategy-2024-2028/)
[28] Artificial Intelligence and Digitalisation of Judicial Cooperation – eucrim. (https://eucrim.eu/articles/artificial-intelligence-and-digitalisation-of-judicial-cooperation/)
[32] Online Dispute Resolution Platform | European Consumer Centers Network. (https://www.eccnet.eu/consumer-rights/exercising-your-consumer-rights/online-dispute-resolution-platform)
[33] The End of the European Online Dispute Resolution Platform – Bird & Bird. (https://www.twobirds.com/en/insights/2025/global/the-end-of-the-european-online-dispute-resolution-platform)
[36] The new global imperative to modernise justice systems – PwC. (https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/industries/government-public-sector/public-sector-research-centre/global-imperative-modernise-justice-systems.html)
[37] www.europarl.europa.eu (COUNCIL OF EUROPE – European Ethical Charter on the use of AI in judicial systems). (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/196205/COUNCIL%20OF%20EUROPE%20-%20European%20Ethical%20Charter%20on%20the%20use%20of%20AI%20in%20judicial%20systems.pdf)
[38] The EU AI Act and Its Adherence to the European Convention on Human Rights – EMILDAI. (https://emildai.eu/the-eu-ai-act-and-its-adherence-to-the-european-convention-on-human-rights/)
[39] Ethical Challenges of Using Artificial Intelligence in Judiciary – arXiv. (https://arxiv.org/html/2504.19284v1)
[40] Digitising Estonia’s Judicial Systems – Courts Data Solutions. (https://courtsdatasolutions.com/analysing-estonias-approach-to-digitising-judicial-systems/)
[41] improving the management of the public justice service – Cour des comptes. (https://www.ccomptes.fr/sites/default/files/2021-11/20211021-Justice.pdf)
[42] Estonia – Cross-Regional Court Performance Assessment – Country Report – EBRD. (https://www.ebrd.com/content/dam/ebrd_dxp/assets/pdfs/legal-reform/dispute-resolution/country-reports/country%20report%20estonia.pdf)
[48] ITALY NATIONAL BRIEFING PAPER – Validity Foundation. (https://validity.ngo/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/CNR_NBP_EN_FINAL.pdf)
[49] The Processo Civile Telematico and the Italian legal framework: a perspective – SAS Open Journals. (https://journals.sas.ac.uk/deeslr/article/download/2213/2147/3318)
[54] Council of Europe Releases First AI Advisory Report on Justice Systems – BABL AI (referencing CEPEJ Resource Centre data). (https://babl.ai/council-of-europe-releases-first-ai-advisory-report-on-justice-systems/)
[59] The EU’s AI Act: Implications on Justice and Counter-Terrorism – GNET. (https://gnet-research.org/2025/03/10/the-eus-ai-act-implications-on-justice-and-counter-terrorism/)
[64] Success stories | Research and Innovation – European Union (CULTEXP Project). (https://projects.research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/en/projects/success-stories)
[65] ai approaches to predictive justice: a critical assessment – CRIS Unibo. (https://cris.unibo.it/retrieve/079bb8ae-b3fb-42e1-a93f-c25da92f4020/AI%20Approaches%20to%20Predictive%20Justice%20A%20Critical%20Assessment.pdf)
[70] Human rights and justice must be at the heart of the upcoming Commission guidelines on the AI Act implementation – ECNL.org. (https://ecnl.org/news/human-rights-and-justice-must-be-heart-upcoming-commission-guidelines-ai-act-implementation)
[77] EU Fundamental Rights Agency report on AI algorithm biases – MIAI – AI-Regulation.com (referencing FRA’s 2022 report). (https://ai-regulation.com/eu-fundamental-rights-agency-report-on-ai-algorithm-biases/)