Presenting a conceptual framework for digital judicial transformation for digital governance

Document Type : Research Paper


1 Assistant Prof., Department of Digital Judicial Transformation, Faculty of Statistics and Information Technology, Judiciary Research Institute, Tehran, Iran.

2 Associate Prof., Department of Information Technology Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.


Objective: Increasing advances in emerging technologies in all areas have led to profound changes at the community level. Legal and judicial systems have also undergone technological changes. They are looking for a digitally capable system in which judicial services and, consequently, justice is available to all citizens. The judicial system in our country is facing some challenges, including procrastination, which despite the use of various systems in the judicial system of the country has not yet been resolved. Benefiting from digital transformation as a solution to challenges as well as the potential to create new opportunities will be effective in providing better judicial services. This article aims to design a conceptual framework for digital judicial transformation to create a systematic perspective on the transformation of the judiciary.
Methods: After studying the background of the subject and comparative study and content analysis of international research, the initial framework was designed. Then, during the two phases of the focus group, the initial framework was validated. The first focus group consisted of six legal experts and the second group consisted of seven experts in the field of law and information technology.
Results: Finally, the framework was designed with seven main sections, which include enablers (including two layers of infrastructure components and technological components), applications (including challenges, drivers and opportunities), judicial ecosystem (including two Layer of internal and external stakeholders), digital transformation governance, digital transformation roadmap (including three layers of vision, goals and plans) and digital transformation journey (including five stages).
Conclusion: In order to create digital judicial transformation, a systematic perspective must be created that, in addition to hard dimensions such as technologies, also considers soft dimensions such as culture, skills and laws. Consider different types of stakeholders and use the benefits and incentives of technologies to solve challenges. There should also be a clear vision and specific goals and plans in this regard.


Aboalmaali, F.S., Daneshfard, K., & Pourezzat, A.A. (2020). A Pattern to Recognition of Triggering Element of Open Government Implementation in Iran's Public Organizations (Case Study: Ministry of Interior). Journal of Public Administration, 12(1), 145-174. (in Persian)
Cabral, J. E. Chavan, A. Clarke, T.M. Greacen, J. Hough, B.R. Rexer, L. Ribadeneyra. J. & Zorza, R. (2012), Using Technology to Enhance Access to Justice, Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, Volume 26, Number 1, 241-324.
Deloitte, (2017), Digital Justice and Citizen Engagement, available at:
Digital Malta, (2014). National Digital Strategy 2014 – 2020.
Finucan, L, Sierra, E.B. and Rajesh, N. (2018), Smart Courts: Roadmap for Digital
Transformation of Justice in Africa.
Fletcher, M. (2019). IoT Applications and Instant Networks for Law Enforcement, webinar presented by Bureau of Justice Assistance, Tuesday Jul 30, 2019 - 01:00pm to 02:00pm EDT, available at
Javan S, shahbazi nia M, majid G. Access to court and information and communication technology (2017). 22: (79 and 80): 121-148, URL: (in Persian).
Judicial Council of California (2019), Strategic Plan for Technology 2019–2022, San Francisco, California 94102-3688
Kennedy, D. (2019). 2019 Cloud Computing, Techreport sponsored by American Bar Association, October 02, 2019, available at
Kronblad, Ch. (2019). The Last Hour: How Digitalization has Transformed Firms in the Legal Industry, Master thesis, Technology Management & Economics, Chalmers University of Technology.
Krueger, R.A. & Casey, M.A. (2000). Focus groups: A practicalguide for applied researchers (4rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
McKinsey (2016), Digital Middle East: Transforming the region into a leading digital economy, Tarek Elmasry, Enrico Benni, Jigar Patel, Jan Peter aus dem Moore.
Ministry of Attorney General of British Columbia (2019), Court Digital Transformation Strategy 2019-23.
Ministry of Enterprise and Innovation of Sweden (2017). For sustainable digital transformation in Sweden – a Digital Strategy, Fact sheet, Article no. N2017.25.
NSW Department of Justice, (2018), Digital Courts Reform, by Catherine D’Elia, Australia.
OECD/European Union (2019), Supporting Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Higher Education in Italy, Chapter 5. Digital transformation and capabilities. Pp.125-145.
OECD (2019), Global OECD Roundtable on Equal Access to Justice, 27 – 28 March 2019, Lisbon, Portugal.
Pourghahramani B, esmaili A. (2019), The Challenges of E- Proceedings in Iran. (87) 24, 29-59 URL: (in persian) 
Queensland Government (2020). Strategic Plan 2018–22. Department of Justice and Attorney‑General.
Saghafi, F., Yaghoobi, N., & Ansari, S. (2018). Comparative Study of E-government Foresight Projects in the World in Order to opt as the Benchmark for Iran. Journal of Public Administration, 10(2), 187-208. (in Persian)
Salimi, J., & Maknoon, R. (2018). Qualitative Meta-analysis of Scientific Researches Concerning the Issue of Governance in Iran. Journal of Public Administration, 10(1), 1-30.
Scottish courts and Tribunals Service (2018), Digital Strategy – 2018-2023.
The Police Foundation and CGI (2017), Reforming justice for the digital age, by Liz Crowhurst.
UN (2020), E-Government Survey 2020; Digital Government in the Decade of Action for Sustainable Development, Department of Economic and Social affairs.
Wilkinson, S. (2004). Focus group research. In D.Silverman (ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method, and practice (pp. 177-199). Thousand oaks, CA: Sage.