Date: 04 JUNE, 2026

Time: 08:00 PM (BST)

Platform: Online (Zoom)

 

Organizer: Bangladesh Institute for Judicial Advancement (BIJA)

 

Host & Moderator: Jeba Mobashwira

Founder & Executive Director, BIJA

 

Distinguished Guest Speakers

1. Barrister Sara Hossain
   • Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of Bangladesh
   • Partner, Dr. Kamal Hossain & Associates
   • Honorary Executive Director, BLAST
   • Professor of Practice, London School of Economics
   • Head, Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Iran
2. Justice Mohammad Imman Ali
   • Former Justice, Appellate Division, Supreme Court of Bangladesh

 

Number of Participants: 55+

 

Objectives of the Session

The session was organized to critically examine the present state of Bangladesh’s justice system and explore how digital transformation can contribute to building a more efficient, transparent, accessible, and inclusive judiciary. The specific objectives of the session were:

1. To understand the concept and significance of a Digitalized Justice System and assess how technology can improve judicial efficiency, case management, service delivery, and access to justice.
2. To explore the concept of an Inclusive Justice System and identify the barriers faced by women, persons with disabilities, rural populations, marginalized communities, refugees, and other vulnerable groups in accessing judicial services.
3. To examine the major causes of case backlog, delays, and procedural complexities within the existing judicial framework and discuss how digital tools can help address these challenges.
4. To evaluate the effectiveness of existing digital initiatives in Bangladesh’s judiciary, including virtual hearings, e-filing, online cause lists, case tracking systems, judicial dashboards, e-payment mechanisms, and digital bail bond systems.
5. To identify institutional, legal, technological, and human-resource barriers that hinder the successful implementation of judicial digitalization and sustainable reform.
6. To discuss the role of emerging technologies, particularly Artificial Intelligence (AI), in legal research, case management, judicial administration, and improving access to legal information while recognizing associated risks and ethical concerns.
7. To assess the importance of privacy, cybersecurity, and data protection in the development of digital justice platforms and identify safeguards necessary to protect litigants and legal professionals.
8. To explore practical strategies for making digital justice accessible and inclusive, ensuring that technological advancements do not deepen existing social, economic, geographical, or physical inequalities.
9. To gather expert insights and recommendations from leading legal practitioners and judicial reform advocates regarding future legal, policy, and institutional reforms required for a modern justice system.
10. To encourage collaboration among the judiciary, legal profession, government institutions, academia, civil society organizations, technology experts, and young legal professionals in advancing judicial modernization and access to justice.
11. To support BIJA’s ongoing research, advocacy, and digital legal literacy initiatives by incorporating expert perspectives on judicial reform, inclusivity, transparency, and technological innovation.
12. To promote a long-term vision for a citizen-centered justice system that is transparent, accountable, efficient, technology-enabled, and capable of ensuring equal access to justice for all members of society.

 

Summary of Discussion

The session began with a welcome address by Jeba Mobashwira, Founder and Executive Director of the Bangladesh Institute for Judicial Advancement (BIJA). She introduced the distinguished guest speaker, Barrister Sara Hossain, highlighting her extensive contributions to human rights, constitutional law, access to justice, and legal reform at both national and international levels

.In her keynote discussion, Barrister Sara Hossain focused on the relationship between a Digitalized Justice System and an Inclusive Justice System, emphasizing that judicial reform should always begin with the principle of access to justice. She noted that while digitalization has enormous potential to improve judicial efficiency, it must be designed in a way that addresses existing inequalities rather than reinforcing them. She highlighted the challenges faced by individuals due to geographical distance, disability, socio-economic conditions, language barriers, gender, age, and other forms of marginalization. According to her, a truly inclusive justice system must ensure equal opportunities for all individuals to seek remedies and protect their fundamental rights.

The discussion then moved to the issue of judicial delays and case backlogs in Bangladesh. Barrister Sara explained that delays are caused by a combination of outdated procedures, lengthy investigation processes, inefficient witness management, administrative bottlenecks, corruption, political influence, and insufficient case management mechanisms. She stressed that prolonged litigation imposes severe financial, psychological, and social burdens on litigants, often discouraging them from pursuing justice and undermining public confidence in the judicial system.

The conversation also explored the progress made in judicial digitalization over the past decade. Barrister Sara highlighted several important developments, including virtual court hearings, e-filing systems, online cause lists, case-tracking mechanisms, judicial monitoring dashboards, digital payment facilities, and pilot e-bail bond initiatives. While acknowledging these achievements, she emphasized that many digital initiatives remain fragmented and project-dependent, underscoring the need for a unified, sustainable, and institutionalized digital justice framework.

A significant portion of the discussion focused on how technology can improve different stages of judicial proceedings. The speakers noted that digital tools can streamline filing procedures, improve case tracking, facilitate communication between courts and litigants, reduce unnecessary travel, strengthen transparency, and accelerate the execution of judicial orders. Examples from the COVID-19 period demonstrated how virtual hearings enabled participation by lawyers, litigants, and marginalized communities from remote locations, thereby reducing geographical barriers to justice.

The discussion further examined the major obstacles to digital transformation within the judiciary. These included the absence of a centralized case database, limited digital literacy among legal professionals and court users, inadequate infrastructure, insufficient maintenance of technological resources, and resistance to change within institutional structures. Both speakers emphasized that successful digitalization requires not only technological investment but also long-term capacity building and cultural transformation within the justice sector.

During the session, Justice Mohammad Iman Ali joined the discussion and shared valuable insights from his experience in pioneering judicial digitalization initiatives in Bangladesh. He reflected on the introduction of the Digital Cause List and virtual court systems, emphasizing that meaningful reform requires vision, commitment, and institutional willpower. He argued that digitalization can significantly reduce opportunities for corruption, improve transparency, and make judicial services more accessible to ordinary citizens. He also stressed that technology should become an integral component of the judicial system rather than remaining dependent on temporary projects.

The role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in judicial administration and legal practice was also discussed. Barrister Sara Hossain acknowledged the potential of AI to assist legal research, document management, and case analysis. However, she cautioned against excessive reliance on AI-generated content due to the risk of inaccurate or fabricated legal references. Justice Iman Ali similarly emphasized the need for legal professionals to independently verify AI-generated information and maintain professional judgment when utilizing technological tools.

The session extensively addressed the issue of inclusive access to justice, particularly for women, persons with disabilities, rural populations, and other marginalized groups. The speakers discussed how assistive technologies, virtual hearings, digital legal resources, and remote participation mechanisms can help remove traditional barriers to justice. They emphasized that technological innovation must be accompanied by sensitivity to the social, cultural, and psychological realities faced by vulnerable individuals, especially victims of violence and discrimination.

Another important theme was privacy, cybersecurity, and data protection. Barrister Sara highlighted the risks associated with digital platforms, including unauthorized access to personal information and potential cyber threats. She advocated for stronger legal protections, secure communication systems, and the adoption of privacy-by-design principles to ensure the safety and confidentiality of litigants and legal professionals.

 

The interactive question-and-answer session allowed participants to raise concerns regarding the sustainability of digital projects, legal aid accessibility, disability inclusion, infrastructure maintenance, and judicial recruitment practices. In response, the speakers emphasized the importance of sustainable institutional reform, stronger collaboration among stakeholders, modernization of legal aid services, and continued advocacy for disability-inclusive policies.

In the concluding segment, both speakers underscored that judicial digitalization is not merely a technological initiative but a comprehensive reform process involving legal frameworks, institutional accountability, ethical safeguards, infrastructure development, and human-centered approaches. They called for stronger partnerships among government institutions, the judiciary, legal professionals, civil society organizations, academic institutions, and technology experts to build a transparent, efficient, and inclusive justice system for Bangladesh.

Key Insights on Digitalization of the Judiciary

The discussion highlighted that digitalization is not merely the adoption of technology within courts; rather, it is a transformative process aimed at enhancing efficiency, transparency, accountability, accessibility, and public trust in the justice system. The key insights that emerged from the session are summarized below:

1. Digitalization Must Support Access to Justice

The primary objective of judicial digitalization should be to improve access to justice for all citizens. Technology should reduce geographical, financial, and procedural barriers rather than create new forms of exclusion. Digital reforms must therefore be designed with inclusivity and user accessibility in mind.

2. Existing Digital Initiatives Have Demonstrated Positive Results

Several digital reforms have already shown promising outcomes within Bangladesh’s judiciary, including:

• Virtual court hearings
• E-filing systems
• Online cause lists
• Digital case tracking mechanisms
• Judicial monitoring dashboards
• Mobile-based court fee and payment systems
• E-Bail Bond initiatives

These initiatives have improved convenience, reduced physical visits to courts, and enhanced transparency in judicial processes.

3. Virtual Hearings Can Significantly Improve Accessibility

The experience of virtual courts during and after the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated that litigants, lawyers, and stakeholders can participate in judicial proceedings from remote locations. Virtual hearings reduce travel costs, save time, and allow greater participation from individuals living outside major urban centers.

4. Digitalization Can Reduce Case Delays and Backlogs

Effective digital case management systems can help streamline judicial procedures by:

• Simplifying filing processes
• Improving case classification and scheduling
• Enhancing document management
• Facilitating faster communication between stakeholders
• Monitoring case progress in real time

These measures can contribute significantly to reducing case congestion and improving disposal rates.

5. Transparency Is One of the Greatest Benefits of Digital Justice

A transparent digital system can minimize opportunities for manipulation, unnecessary delays, and unofficial intermediaries. Digital publication of court orders, judgments, case status updates, and procedural information can strengthen public confidence in the judiciary.

6. A Centralized Judicial Database Is Essential

One of the major challenges identified during the discussion is the absence of a comprehensive centralized database for court records and case information. A unified digital database would improve record management, facilitate information sharing, support judicial planning, and provide a foundation for future technological innovations.

7. Sustainable Institutionalization Is More Important Than Project-Based Reforms

Both speakers emphasized that many digital initiatives remain dependent on temporary projects. Sustainable reform requires digital systems to become a permanent and integral part of judicial administration, supported by long-term budgeting, maintenance, technical support, and institutional ownership.

8. Human Capacity Building Is Critical for Success

Technology alone cannot reform the justice system. Judges, lawyers, court staff, and litigants must be equipped with the necessary digital skills and training to effectively utilize technological tools. Continuous capacity-building programs are therefore essential.

9. Artificial Intelligence Has Potential but Requires Caution

Artificial Intelligence can assist legal research, document analysis, and case management. However, AI-generated outputs must always be verified by legal professionals because inaccurate references, fabricated legal authorities, and misinformation may undermine judicial integrity if used without scrutiny.

10. Digitalization Must Be Accompanied by Privacy and Cybersecurity Safeguards

As judicial services move online, protecting personal data and confidential information becomes increasingly important. Robust cybersecurity measures, secure communication systems, and strong data protection frameworks are necessary to maintain public trust and safeguard sensitive legal information.

11. Inclusive Design Must Be Embedded in Every Digital Reform

Digital justice systems should be designed to accommodate the needs of:

• Women
• Persons with disabilities
• Elderly citizens
• Rural populations
• Marginalized communities
• Victims of violence and abuse

Assistive technologies, remote participation options, sign-language interpretation, and accessible digital platforms can help ensure equal participation in judicial processes.

12. Technology Must Complement Human Sensitivity

A recurring theme throughout the discussion was that technology should never replace human judgment, empathy, or fairness. While digital tools can enhance efficiency and accessibility, successful judicial reform ultimately depends on maintaining a people-centered approach that respects the dignity, privacy, and unique circumstances of every individual seeking justice.

 

Barriers to Digital Transformation

During the discussion, the speakers identified several significant barriers that continue to hinder the successful digital transformation of Bangladesh’s judiciary. These challenges can broadly be categorized into institutional, technical, and human resource-related barriers.

1. Institutional Challenges

The speakers emphasized that one of the most significant obstacles to judicial digitalization is the absence of a comprehensive and integrated institutional framework.

Key institutional challenges include:

• Lack of a Centralized Database: A complete and unified database containing records of all pending and disposed cases has not yet been established, making effective digital case management difficult.
• Project-Based Implementation: Many digital initiatives are introduced through temporary development projects rather than being institutionalized as permanent components of the judiciary.
• Insufficient Coordination: Effective digital transformation requires close coordination among the judiciary, government ministries, law enforcement agencies, prisons, and other relevant institutions, which remains limited in many areas.
• Outdated Procedures and Regulations: Several judicial procedures continue to rely on traditional paper-based systems, creating inconsistencies between modern technology and existing practices.
• Limited Long-Term Planning: Digital reforms often focus on short-term implementation rather than long-term sustainability, maintenance, and expansion.

2. Technical Challenges

Technical and infrastructural limitations continue to affect the effectiveness and sustainability of digital justice initiatives.

Key technical challenges include:

• Inadequate Digital Infrastructure: Many courts lack sufficient technological equipment, modern hardware, and integrated digital systems.
• Internet Connectivity Issues: Unstable internet connections, particularly in remote and rural areas, can disrupt virtual hearings and digital services.
• Maintenance Deficiencies: Technological equipment provided under various projects is often not properly maintained or replaced when damaged, reducing long-term effectiveness.
• Lack of Integrated Platforms: Existing digital services such as e-filing, case tracking, online cause lists, and payment systems often operate separately rather than within a unified judicial platform.
• Data Management Limitations: Large volumes of historical case records remain undigitized, making it difficult to create a fully functional digital case management system.
• Cybersecurity and Privacy Risks: As judicial information becomes increasingly digital, concerns regarding data security, unauthorized access, and privacy protection become more significant.

3. Human Resource Challenges

The discussion highlighted that technological advancement alone cannot ensure successful digital transformation without adequate human capacity and willingness to adapt.

Key human resource challenges include:

• Limited Digital Literacy: Many judges, lawyers, court staff, and court users require additional training to effectively utilize digital systems and services.
• Resistance to Change: Some stakeholders remain reluctant to move away from traditional methods due to familiarity with existing processes or concerns about adapting to new technologies.
• Insufficient Training and Capacity Building: Continuous professional development programs on digital tools and judicial technology remain inadequate.
• Heavy Workloads: Judges, lawyers, and court personnel often face significant workloads, making it difficult to allocate additional time for learning and implementing new systems.
• Lack of Specialized Technical Personnel: Courts frequently lack dedicated IT professionals and technical support teams capable of maintaining and improving digital infrastructure.
• Digital Accessibility Gaps: Certain groups, including elderly individuals, persons with disabilities, and technologically disadvantaged citizens, may face difficulties accessing and utilizing digital judicial services without appropriate support mechanisms.

The speakers concluded that overcoming these barriers requires a comprehensive approach involving institutional commitment, sustainable investment, technological modernization, capacity building, and a strong culture of innovation and accountability within the justice sector.

 

Remarks by Justice Mohammad Iman Ali

During the session, Justice Mohammad Iman Ali joined the discussion and shared valuable insights drawn from his extensive experience in judicial administration and his pioneering role in introducing digital reforms within Bangladesh’s judiciary. His remarks provided both practical lessons and a broader vision for the future of judicial modernization.

Justice Iman Ali emphasized that the success of any reform initiative depends primarily on institutional willpower and leadership. According to him, resistance to change often arises from a preference for maintaining the status quo and, in some cases, from vested interests that benefit from inefficiencies and lack of transparency. Therefore, meaningful digital transformation requires not only technological solutions but also a strong commitment to reform at all levels of the justice system.

 

Reflecting on his experience, he highlighted the introduction of the Digital Cause List in the Supreme Court in 2011, which was designed to make judicial information more accessible to ordinary citizens. His vision was to ensure that even individuals living in remote rural areas could easily obtain information regarding the status of their cases through digital platforms.

 

Justice Iman Ali also discussed the implementation of virtual courts and digital evidence systems, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. He noted that despite significant legal, technical, and institutional challenges, these initiatives demonstrated that judicial services can be delivered effectively beyond traditional courtroom settings. Virtual hearings enabled participation from litigants, lawyers, and stakeholders located both within Bangladesh and abroad, significantly expanding access to justice.

 

A recurring theme in his remarks was the importance of transparency and accountability. He explained that digitalization has the potential to reduce opportunities for corruption by minimizing unnecessary intermediaries and increasing public access to judicial information. As an example, he observed that if judgments, orders, and case updates are published digitally and become immediately accessible after judicial approval, opportunities for manipulation, delay, or misinformation can be significantly reduced.

 

Justice Iman Ali further stressed that digitalization should not remain dependent on temporary development projects. Instead, technology must become an integral and permanent component of judicial administration, supported by sustainable funding, institutional ownership, regular maintenance, and long-term strategic planning.

 

Addressing the issue of Artificial Intelligence, he advised legal professionals to exercise caution when using AI-generated legal materials. He warned that AI may produce inaccurate or fabricated legal references and emphasized the importance of independently verifying all legal authorities and case citations before relying on them in judicial proceedings.

 

He also highlighted the importance of ensuring that technological reforms remain human-centered. Drawing from practical experiences, he explained that while digital tools can improve efficiency and accessibility, judicial processes must continue to consider the psychological comfort, privacy, and dignity of litigants, particularly victims of violence and vulnerable individuals.

 

In response to concerns regarding accessibility and inclusion, Justice Iman Ali stressed that digitalization should be implemented as a universal judicial reform rather than as isolated pilot projects. He advocated for a justice system that accommodates the needs of all citizens, including persons with disabilities, marginalized communities, and individuals residing in remote areas.

 

Concluding his remarks, Justice Iman Ali encouraged young lawyers, researchers, and future legal professionals to actively participate in the modernization of the justice system. He expressed confidence that the younger generation, with their familiarity with technology and commitment to reform, can play a vital role in building a more transparent, efficient, accessible, and accountable judiciary for Bangladesh. He reiterated that with vision, commitment, and integrity, meaningful digital transformation of the justice system is both achievable and necessary.

 

Discussion on Artificial Intelligence (AI)

The session included an important discussion on the growing role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the justice sector and its potential impact on judicial administration, legal research, case management, and access to justice. While acknowledging the transformative possibilities of AI, both Barrister Sara Hossain and Justice Mohammad Iman Ali emphasized the need for cautious, responsible, and ethical implementation.

 

Barrister Sara Hossain observed that AI has the potential to significantly improve the efficiency of legal work by assisting with legal research, document review, information retrieval, case analysis, and administrative tasks. In a justice system burdened by case backlogs and procedural delays, AI-powered tools could help legal professionals save time, manage large volumes of information, and improve overall productivity.

 

However, she stressed that the effectiveness of AI largely depends on the availability, quality, and accuracy of digital legal data. At present, many legal documents, judgments, statutes, gazettes, and historical records in Bangladesh are not fully digitized or easily accessible online. As a result, the full benefits of AI cannot be realized without first establishing a comprehensive and reliable digital legal database. She emphasized that digitization of judicial records and legal resources must precede large-scale AI integration.

 

Justice Mohammad Iman Ali echoed these observations and highlighted several practical concerns regarding the use of AI in legal practice. He noted that AI systems can sometimes generate inaccurate information, fabricate legal authorities, or produce references that do not actually exist. Such errors can be particularly dangerous when lawyers or researchers rely on AI-generated outputs without proper verification.

 

Both speakers strongly emphasized that AI should serve as a supportive tool rather than a substitute for professional legal judgment. Legal practitioners must continue to exercise critical analysis, verify legal sources independently, and ensure that all AI-assisted work meets professional and ethical standards.

 

The discussion also underscored the importance of maintaining human oversight in judicial decision-making. While AI can assist with research, information management, and procedural efficiency, matters involving legal interpretation, judicial discretion, fairness, and the protection of rights must remain under human control. The speakers agreed that justice requires context, empathy, ethical reasoning, and an understanding of human circumstances—qualities that technology alone cannot provide.

 

In addition, concerns were raised regarding transparency, accountability, privacy, and potential bias within AI systems. The speakers noted that if AI tools are trained on incomplete, inaccurate, or biased datasets, they may unintentionally reinforce existing inequalities or produce unfair outcomes. Therefore, any future adoption of AI within the justice sector must be accompanied by appropriate safeguards, transparency mechanisms, and regulatory oversight.

 

Overall, the discussion concluded that AI presents significant opportunities for modernizing the justice system and improving efficiency. However, its successful integration requires reliable digital infrastructure, comprehensive legal databases, strong ethical standards, proper training for legal professionals, and continuous human supervision. The speakers agreed that AI should be viewed as an enabling technology that enhances access to justice and judicial efficiency while preserving the fundamental principles of fairness, accountability, and the rule of law.

 

Inclusive Justice and Access to Justice

A central theme of the session was the relationship between inclusive justice and access to justice, which Barrister Sara Hossain identified as the foundation of any effective and equitable judicial system. She emphasized that the success of a justice system should not be measured solely by the number of cases disposed of or the efficiency of court procedures, but also by the extent to which all individuals, regardless of their background or circumstances, are able to access legal remedies and exercise their rights equally.

 

The discussion highlighted that access to justice is not experienced uniformly across society. Various social, economic, geographical, and physical factors significantly influence an individual’s ability to seek legal redress. While the Constitution prohibits discrimination on specific grounds, the speakers noted that barriers related to age, disability, geographical location, language, socio-economic status, and social marginalization continue to affect people’s ability to engage effectively with the justice system.

 

Particular attention was given to the challenges faced by women, persons with disabilities, rural populations, refugees, migrant communities, and other marginalized groups. For many individuals living outside major urban centers, accessing courts often involves substantial travel expenses, time commitments, and logistical difficulties. Similarly, persons with disabilities frequently encounter physical barriers within court facilities and procedural obstacles that limit their meaningful participation in legal proceedings.

 

The speakers emphasized that digitalization has the potential to significantly enhance inclusivity when implemented thoughtfully. Virtual hearings, online case management systems, digital legal resources, and remote participation mechanisms can help overcome geographical barriers and reduce the financial and physical burdens associated with court attendance. These technologies can enable individuals from remote areas to participate in judicial proceedings without extensive travel and can improve access for those who face mobility challenges.

 

The discussion also explored how technology can support persons with disabilities. Barrister Sara Hossain highlighted the availability of assistive technologies that can help individuals with visual impairments, hearing impairments, speech disabilities, and other accessibility needs engage with digital content and legal processes. She noted that if legal documents, court notices, and judicial information are made available in accessible digital formats, many existing barriers can be substantially reduced.

 

For individuals with hearing impairments, the speakers suggested the use of sign-language interpreters during virtual hearings, enabling qualified interpreters from any part of the country to participate remotely. Such measures would expand access to justice services while reducing the limitations imposed by geographical location.

 

The discussion further addressed the experiences of women and victims of violence. The speakers observed that many women face practical and cultural barriers to attending court proceedings, particularly when required to travel long distances or repeatedly appear in unfamiliar environments. Virtual participation options can provide greater flexibility, safety, and privacy. In sensitive matters, including cases involving gender-based violence or child abuse, remote testimony and digital hearing arrangements may help reduce trauma and encourage greater participation in legal proceedings.

 

At the same time, both speakers cautioned that digitalization alone cannot guarantee inclusivity. If technological reforms fail to consider existing inequalities, they may inadvertently create new forms of exclusion. Individuals with limited digital literacy, inadequate internet access, or insufficient technological resources may find themselves further marginalized. Therefore, digital justice initiatives must be accompanied by support services, public awareness programs, legal literacy campaigns, and accessible user-friendly platforms.

 

Justice Mohammad Iman Ali emphasized that inclusivity must extend beyond access to judicial services and should also encompass participation within the justice system itself. He stressed the importance of creating opportunities for persons with disabilities and other underrepresented groups to serve as lawyers, judges, and judicial professionals. Achieving true inclusion requires addressing structural and institutional barriers within legal education, recruitment systems, and professional advancement pathways.

 

A recurring message throughout the discussion was that technology should complement, rather than replace, human sensitivity. Effective justice requires empathy, dignity, privacy, and respect for individual circumstances. Consequently, all digital reforms should be designed through a human-centered approach that prioritizes the needs, experiences, and rights of those who face the greatest obstacles in accessing justice.

 

The session concluded that building an inclusive justice system requires a combination of legal reform, institutional commitment, technological innovation, accessibility measures, and social awareness. By integrating these elements, Bangladesh can move toward a justice system that is more accessible, equitable, responsive, and capable of serving all members of society without discrimination or exclusion.

 

Privacy and Cybersecurity Concerns

The discussion highlighted that while digitalization offers significant opportunities to improve judicial efficiency, transparency, and accessibility, it also introduces important challenges related to privacy, data protection, and cybersecurity. As judicial processes increasingly rely on digital platforms, safeguarding sensitive information becomes essential to maintaining public trust and protecting the rights of litigants, lawyers, judges, and other stakeholders.

 

Barrister Sara Hossain emphasized that any digital justice system must be designed with strong privacy protections from the outset. She noted that judicial proceedings often involve highly sensitive personal information, including family disputes, criminal allegations, medical records, financial information, and confidential legal communications. Unauthorized access to such information could expose individuals to harassment, discrimination, reputational harm, or other forms of abuse.

 

One concern raised during the discussion was the widespread practice of publicly sharing personal contact information without adequate safeguards. Barrister Sara referred to instances where personal mobile phone numbers of legal professionals were made available through official platforms, potentially exposing them to unwanted communication, harassment, and security risks. She noted that such practices can disproportionately affect women and other vulnerable groups.

 

The speakers stressed the importance of developing a comprehensive legal and policy framework for data protection and privacy within the justice sector. As courts adopt digital platforms for filing, hearings, payments, and case management, clear standards must be established regarding the collection, storage, processing, sharing, and retention of personal information. Robust legal protections are necessary to ensure that sensitive data is handled responsibly and securely.

 

Cybersecurity was identified as another critical concern. Digital court systems, online databases, and virtual hearing platforms may become targets of cyberattacks, unauthorized access, data breaches, and other forms of digital interference. Such incidents could compromise judicial records, disrupt court operations, or undermine confidence in digital justice initiatives. Therefore, investment in secure technological infrastructure, encryption systems, authentication mechanisms, and regular security monitoring is essential.

 

The discussion also highlighted the need for a culture of cybersecurity awareness among all users of digital justice systems. Judges, lawyers, court staff, and litigants must be educated about safe digital practices, secure communication methods, password protection, and the responsible handling of confidential information. Human error often remains one of the greatest vulnerabilities within digital systems, making awareness and training critical components of cybersecurity.

 

A key principle emphasized by Barrister Sara Hossain was “Privacy by Design.” This approach requires privacy and security considerations to be integrated into the development and operation of digital platforms from the beginning rather than being treated as afterthoughts. By embedding privacy safeguards into system architecture, judicial institutions can better protect sensitive information while ensuring that digital services remain accessible and user-friendly.

 

The speakers further observed that privacy protection is particularly important in cases involving women, children, victims of violence, persons with disabilities, and other vulnerable individuals. Digital systems should include special safeguards to prevent unauthorized disclosure of personal identities, sensitive testimony, or confidential records that could expose individuals to additional risks or harm.

 

Overall, the discussion concluded that privacy and cybersecurity are not secondary concerns but fundamental requirements for a successful digital justice system. Effective digital transformation must balance accessibility and efficiency with strong protections for personal data, confidentiality, and information security. Building public confidence in digital justice will depend largely on the ability of institutions to ensure that technological innovation is accompanied by robust privacy safeguards, cybersecurity measures, and responsible data governance practices.

 

Recommendations

Based on the discussion among the distinguished speakers, participants, and Q&A session, a set of comprehensive recommendations emerged to guide future judicial reform, digital transformation, and inclusive justice initiatives in Bangladesh.

 

1. Development of a Unified Digital Justice System

A centralized and integrated digital platform should be established for the entire judiciary to ensure seamless case management, filing, tracking, hearings, and judgment delivery. Fragmented systems should be consolidated into a single interoperable framework.

 

2. Institutionalization of Digital Reforms

Digital initiatives should move beyond temporary or project-based implementation and be formally embedded into the permanent structure of the judiciary. This requires long-term planning, budgeting, and administrative ownership.

3. Strengthening E-Filing and Case Management Systems

Comprehensive e-filing systems should be expanded across all courts to reduce physical dependency, minimize procedural delays, and improve efficiency in case processing and scheduling.

 

4. Centralized Case Database and Digital Archiving

A national-level judicial database should be developed to digitize and preserve all court records, ensuring accessibility, transparency, and efficient retrieval of case information.

 

5. Expansion of Virtual Hearings

Virtual court systems should be further expanded where appropriate, particularly for procedural hearings, bail matters, and cases involving geographically distant litigants, while maintaining procedural fairness and legal safeguards.

 

6. Capacity Building and Digital Literacy Training

Continuous training programs should be introduced for judges, lawyers, court staff, and legal aid workers to enhance digital literacy and ensure effective use of technological tools within the justice system.

 

7. Strengthening Cybersecurity and Data Protection Frameworks

Robust legal and technical frameworks should be developed to ensure data privacy, secure communication, and protection against cyber threats. A strong “Privacy by Design” approach should be adopted in all digital justice systems.

 

8. Ensuring Accessibility and Inclusive Design

All digital justice platforms should be designed to be accessible to persons with disabilities, women, rural communities, and marginalized populations. Assistive technologies, sign-language interpretation, and user-friendly interfaces should be incorporated.

 

9. Integration of AI with Human Oversight

Artificial Intelligence should be introduced in a supportive role for legal research and administrative efficiency, but all AI-generated outputs must be subject to human verification to avoid errors and misinformation.

 

10. Strengthening Legal Aid Services

Legal aid systems should be modernized through collaboration between government institutions, NGOs, universities, and volunteer networks to ensure that digitally disadvantaged populations receive adequate support.

 

 

11. Infrastructure Development and Technical Maintenance

Courts must ensure proper maintenance of digital equipment, reliable internet connectivity, uninterrupted power supply, and continuous technical support to sustain digital systems effectively.

 

12. Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration

Effective judicial reform requires collaboration between the judiciary, government agencies, bar associations, civil society organizations, academic institutions, and technology experts to ensure coordinated and sustainable progress.

 

13. Promotion of Legal Awareness and Digital Literacy

Public awareness campaigns and digital legal literacy programs should be implemented to ensure that citizens understand how to access and benefit from digital judicial services.

 

14. Ensuring Transparency and Accountability

Digital systems should enhance transparency by ensuring real-time access to case information, reducing opportunities for corruption, and minimizing dependence on informal intermediaries within the justice system.

 

15. Long-Term Vision for Human-Centered Justice

All reforms should be guided by a long-term vision of building a justice system that is efficient, transparent, inclusive, technologically advanced, and fundamentally centered on human dignity and fairness.

Conclusion

The session on Digitalized Justice System and Inclusive Justice System in Bangladesh provided a comprehensive and forward-looking examination of the country’s judicial reform landscape. The discussion brought together leading legal minds, including Barrister Sara Hossain and Justice Mohammad Iman Ali, whose insights collectively highlighted both the progress achieved and the structural challenges that remain.

 

A key conclusion of the session is that digitalization of the judiciary is not merely a technological upgrade, but a transformative reform process that must be grounded in principles of access to justice, transparency, accountability, and inclusivity. While Bangladesh’s judiciary has made notable progress through initiatives such as virtual hearings, e-filing, online cause lists, and digital case tracking systems, these reforms remain fragmented and require consolidation into a unified and sustainable system.

 

The discussion emphasized that the true value of digital transformation lies in its ability to reduce inequality in access to justice. Without careful design, digital systems may risk reinforcing existing social, geographical, and economic disparities. Therefore, inclusivity must be embedded at every stage of judicial reform, ensuring that women, persons with disabilities, rural populations, and other marginalized groups are not left behind.

 

Another major takeaway is that institutional willpower and long-term commitment are essential for meaningful reform. Technological solutions alone are insufficient unless supported by legal frameworks, administrative capacity, adequate infrastructure, and continuous human resource development. The judiciary must move beyond project-based initiatives and adopt a permanent, system-wide digital architecture.

 

The role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) was also identified as a significant opportunity for enhancing legal research and administrative efficiency. However, the speakers collectively stressed the need for caution, human oversight, and verification to prevent misinformation and ensure judicial integrity.

 

Equally important is the recognition that privacy, cybersecurity, and data protection are foundational pillars of any digital justice system. Without strong safeguards, digital transformation could expose sensitive information and undermine public trust. Hence, privacy-by-design principles and robust cybersecurity frameworks must be integrated into all reforms.

 

Finally, the session reaffirmed that the future of justice in Bangladesh depends on a balanced integration of technology and human values. Efficiency must be complemented by empathy, innovation must be guided by ethics, and modernization must remain rooted in the fundamental goal of delivering fair and accessible justice for all.

 

The session concluded with a shared understanding that building a truly modern justice system requires sustained collaboration among the judiciary, government institutions, legal professionals, academia, civil society, and the younger generation. With collective commitment and visionary leadership, a more transparent, inclusive, and technology-enabled justice system is both achievable and necessary for Bangladesh’s future.

 

Questions and Answers

1. Syed Kausar Ahmed (Sylhet)

Question: He highlighted that many digitalization projects in courts have suffered due to poor maintenance, with equipment becoming non-functional and infrastructural issues such as power outages and malfunctioning elevators persisting. He questioned whether judicial digitalization can succeed without long-term maintenance and institutional ownership.

 

Response: Barrister Sara Hossain and Justice Mohammad Iman Ali emphasized that digitalization must move beyond project-based initiatives and become an integral part of the judiciary’s institutional framework, supported by clear accountability for maintenance and sustainability.

 

2. Habiba Akhter

Question: She asked how access to justice can be ensured for people who face barriers to using digital platforms due to limited digital literacy, technological access, or financial constraints.

 

Response: Barrister Sara Hossain stressed the importance of modernizing legal aid through collaboration among government, NGOs, universities, and community initiatives. She highlighted the role of students, paralegals, and volunteers in helping people navigate digital systems and ensuring no one is left behind.

 

3. Rezaul Siddiqui

Question: He raised concerns about barriers faced by persons with disabilities in entering and participating in the legal profession, including discriminatory recruitment and examination processes.

Response: Barrister Sara Hossain emphasized the need for continued legal and policy reforms to eliminate discriminatory practices and ensure equal opportunities. Justice Mohammad Iman Ali added that meaningful inclusivity requires addressing both institutional barriers and societal attitudes toward marginalized groups.

 

Rapporteurs

• Surja Mandal
• Aadnan M. Sajid

Date of Submission: 4 June, 2026