Date post: | 17-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | lynn-jenkins |
View: | 215 times |
Download: | 2 times |
Pilot system for electronic processing of utility cases
SOKOP - An experience from BiH
Simone Ginzburg
Batumi, Georgia – 28/09/2011
SOKOP - An experience from
BiH
2
1 State
2 Entities + 1 District
4 Enforcement laws
14 Ministries of Justice
Bosnia – Herzegovina
One High Judicial andProsecutorial Council (2004):
Ensuring the maintenance of an independent, impartial and professional judiciary- Appointments and disciplinary sanctions- Standards for education- Reccomendations for the budgets- Projects- Introduction, approval and monitor of IT systems in judiciary
~ 4 000 000 inhabitants
~ 1 500 000 enforcement “utility cases”
Backlog reduction project (2008 – 2011)
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
3
Outline:
1.Definition of the problem. Challenges and opportunities
2. Brief chronology
3. System overview
4. Final observations
Enforcement is in BiH a judicial process
4
Unpaid bills for:
- Water provision
- Central heating distribution
- Garbage disposal
Unpaid Radio / TV possession fees
Utility cases
Judge – led
• Formalistic • Plaintiff driven
Direct enforcement
Business registries excerpts are considered “Authentic documents”
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
Bailiffs act upon judge’s dispositions:in charge of inventory, seizing and sale of movable properties
55
Enforcement motion
Enforcement
Enforcement decision
Court caseCMS
Debtor’smotivated
timelyobjection
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
6
Intake of plaintiffs submissions: trucks / boxes.Handling and storage
Frequent communication with the plaintiff
Checking / Issuing decisions
Shipping documents
Field work of bailiffs and couriers
Checking service
Plenty of standard communications
Check fees payment by the plaintiffs
Electronic submission
Two-ways electronic communication Court / plaintiffs
Validation of submissions
Scanning and recognition of delivery slips
Single shipping station
Critical process phases and new solutions
Facilitated and mass creation of documents
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
7
Challenges Opportunities
• These cases are not a priority
• Very advanced informatizationof the judiciary:infrastructure / hardware / mindset
• Diverse addresses lists • Advanced informatizationof other State institutions• Data-protection Agency
very restrictive approach
• More eagerness to experiment new practices
• Provisions for electronic submission in the 2003 Civil Procedure Law
• All plaintiffs’ submissions via email
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
8
Council decisionto develop a pilot System for handling of utility cases (SOKOP)October 2008
Visits to www.covl.si November 2008 and February 2009
Software developing - first phaseJuly 2009 – March 2010
First two pilot Courts receive and process casesApril – December 2010
Other seven Courts receive casesJanuary – August 2011
Software developing - second phaseJanuary – June 2011
Backlog entered into the first two pilot CourtsAugust – September 2011
Brief chronology
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
9
Judicial and police network
Internet / https
System architecture
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
One database server and two application servers (virtual machine).
Java Enterprise Edition platform, JEE 5 standard.JPA, EJB3, JAXB, JAAS, JSF - XHTML renderer, JasperReports, web GUI and AJAX (RichFaces), JakartaPOI. Abbyy Flexi Capture 9.0
10
via e-mail digitally signed with a qualified electronic signature
Communication from the plaintiffs to the Court
Submissions: XML + XSL files + optional attachments(one XSL for each type of submission - 9)
ZIP-ped and validated
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
Naslov prezentacije
11
Communication from the Court to the plaintiff
Court documents are made available through the system; plaintiffs send back digitally signed confirmation receipts.
Internet / https
12
- Validate or create submissions for Court
- Search through all their cases and look every case file
- Mark the case for which they want to pay fees
Internet / https
Plaintiffs’ secure internet access also for...
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
13
Printing on-demand
Tasking defined on the basis of the coded address
Possibility for the bailiffs to take over service of documents
Tasks results on standard forms, ready to be scanned and trigger the next action One debtor’s address at a time!
Impact on the bailiffs field work
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
14
Scanned and immediately available through the system to the plaintiffs
Debtor’s and third parties’ submissions
Newly designed delivery slip
Scanning / optical recognition / validation
Possibility of group review
Record of service results
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
15
Each event is signalled to the case handler:- Parties’ submissions- Service results and Bailiffs’ minutes- Expiration of set deadlines- Corrections in the previous data
For each event, one or more documents to be created are suggested, filled with any possible detail (except the motivation!) including addressees and sending options
Mass creation possible only for cases with one event only
Facilitated and mass creation of documents
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
16
IPA 2009 (2011 – 2012)
Include submission of cases which are started as civil claims asking for default judgment in case of lack of reply
Two-way integration with Court CMS
Start to integrate addresses and assetts’ search (first test OK with RS Tax Administration)
Test hybrid post
31.08.2011: 117.078 cases into the system: 55.339 received electronically and 61.739 old cases
Start to work with the backlog cases (3% of debtors account for at least 8% of the cases)
Where now, what next?
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
System for the electronic handling of small claims / utility cases
1717
Enforcement motion
Enforcement
Enforcement decision Court caseCMS
Otheroutcome
Debtor’smotivated
timelyobjection
Small claim
Send the claim for answer
Debtor’sanswer
SOKOP – an experience from BiH
18
• Integration with claims submission:no need to check consistence among confirmed claims and enforcement request
• Communication by the plaintiff in the enforcement phase: case (partial) withdrawal, suspension request, ...
• Complete transparency for the plaintiff
• Flexibility for the plaintiffs to discretionally and gradually integrate their IT systems
• Ability to withold any further action as soon as any relevant event occurs:
• Integration with other databases searches
Final observations: relevant elements
SOKOP – an experience from BiH