-(003)7c630c3b-5993-4d08-9022-0fc810370bbf.png?sfvrsn=83a3b556_1)
Dispute resolution has come a long way since The Law Journal was founded 200 years ago in 1822. And yet it has taken many years after the creation of our modern justice system in 1873 to consider foundational reform. Legal publishing and New Law Journal in particular have played a significant role in persuading lawyers and judges to be forward looking over those years. The legal community is, however, and certainly has historically been resistant to change. It is said quite rightly that the legal system must be stable and dependable, so the fact that it changes slowly is a good thing. But I would argue that, in a rapidly changing digital era, the legal system must be more agile and reform must come more speedily if the legal system is to remain relevant and to continue to protect and defend the rights of ordinary people.
The lives of citizens have already been radically changed by the internet, social media and global corporations. But we are now in the midst of even more fundamental technological developments from which the law is not exempt. Artificial intelligence is already more widely used in the legal sector than most ultimate consumers realise. Within less than a generation, blockchain will come to record immutably every aspect of daily lives and will be used to underpin almost every industrial and financial sector. There will be digital share ownership on-chain, land registration on-chain and digital intellectual property registries on-chain, in addition in all probability to smart on-chain customs and revenue collection.
In addition to these society-wide developments, there is now a real push towards the creation of a truly integrated digital justice system covering civil, family and tribunal cases in England and Wales. The HMCTS reform project has started the ball rolling and I believe that that we will see the completion of an holistic digital justice system within five years. That system will create proportionate, accessible and affordable justice for consumers and small businesses alike.
Alongside these developments, we will all be freed from paper and analogue programs as smart machine readable documentation takes over.
Where then will legal publishing fit into the brave new world that I have described? I have no doubt that there will continue to be a place for thoughtful and topical legal writing and debate. Blogs, vlogs and social media provide immediacy, but journals move the debate forward at a higher level. It is not, I think, just elderly judges that value considered comment and reporting in the digital age. Interestingly, the human brain operates more effectively after a period of reflection. Good ideas are often not created in a flash. They mature and can be improved and honed by constructive debate. The rapidly changing digital era to which I have referred will change none of that. Moreover, the agile reform of the legal system will require even more careful consideration if we are to achieve our ultimate aim, which is to continue to deliver accessible justice and, as I said at the start, to protect and defend the rights of ordinary people.
