Smart Justice in Italy: Cases of Apps Created by Lawyers for Lawyers and Beyond
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Framework
3. Methodology
4. Investigated Apps (A Brief Description)
4.1. An App for Lawyers’ Substitutions: Collega
4.2. An App for Divorce and Parental Conflict Management: Anthea
5. The Analysis of the Two Systems on the Basis of the Theoretical Framework
5.1. Protagonists of Innovation: The Quadruple-Helix Model, the Private Initiative, and the Role of Users’ Base
5.2. Features of New Technology: Ubiquitous, Accessible, Modular, and Interoperable
5.3. Negative Capabilities: Organizational Precondition for Technological Development by Users’ Initiative
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Agrawal, Shashank, and Dario Vieira. 2013. A survey on Internet of Things. Abakós 1: 78–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Albino, Vito, Umberto Berardi, and Rosa Maria Dangelico. 2015. Smart cities: Definitions, dimensions, performance, and initiatives. Journal of Urban Technology 22: 3–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andrade, André, and Luiz Antonio Joia. 2012. Organizational structure and ICT strategies in the Brazilian Judiciary System. Government Information Quarterly 29: S32–S42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bailey, Jane, Jacquelyn Burkell, and Graham Reynolds. 2013a. Access to Justice for All: Towards an Expansive Vision of Justice and Technology. Windsor YB Access Just 31: 181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bailey, Jane, Valerie Steeves, Jacquelyn Burkell, and Priscilla Regan. 2013b. Negotiating with gender stereotypes on social networking sites: From “bicycle face” to Facebook. Journal of Communication Inquiry 37: 91–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baldwin, Carliss Young, Kim B. Clark, and Kim B. Clark. 2000. Design Rules: The Power of Modularity. Cambridge: MIT Press, vol. 1. [Google Scholar]
- Bunnell, Tim. 2015. Smart city returns. Dialogues in Human Geography 5: 45–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calzada, Igor, and Cristobal Cobo. 2015. Unplugging: Deconstructing the smart city. Journal of Urban Technology 22: 23–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carnevali, Davide. 2009. E-justice and policies for risk management. In E-justice: Using Information Communication Technologies in the Court System. Hershey: Information Science Reference, IGI Global, pp. 20–37. [Google Scholar]
- Carnevali, Davide. 2010. Soggetti smarriti: Perché innovazione e giustizia non si incontrano (quasi) mai. Milan: FrancoAngeli. [Google Scholar]
- Carnevali, Davide. 2019. Great Success that Was on the Brink of Failure: The Case of a Techno-Legal Assemblage in the “Civil Trial On-Line” System in Italy. European Quarterly of Political Attitudes and Mentalities 8: 21–35. [Google Scholar]
- Ciborra, Claudio U, and Giovan Francesco Lanzara. 1994. Formative contexts and information technology: Understanding the dynamics of innovation in organizations. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies 4: 61–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ciborra, Claudio U., and Giovan Francesco Lanzara. 2017. Designing dynamic artifacts: Computer systems as formative contexts. In Symbols and Artifacts. London: Routledge, pp. 147–65. [Google Scholar]
- Clarke, Simon P. 2014. Qualitative research: The essential guide to theory and practice [by] Maggi Savin-Baden & Claire Howell Major. Psychology Learning Teaching 13: 66–68. [Google Scholar]
- Coelho, Vitor N., Thays A. Oliveira, Iara V. O. Figueiredo, Marcone J. F. Souza, and Iuri Veloso. 2019. A Multicriteria View about Judicial and Legislative Decision Making in Digital Cities and Societies. In Smart and Digital Cities. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 209–20. [Google Scholar]
- Contini, Francesco, and Giovan Francesco Lanzara. 2009. ICT and Innovation in the Public Sector. London: Palgrave Macmillan. [Google Scholar]
- Contini, Francesco, and Giovan Francesco Lanzara. 2014. The Circulation of Agency in E-Justice. Dordrecht: Springer. [Google Scholar]
- Contini, Francesco, and Marco Fabri. 2003. Judicial electronic data interchange in Europe. In Judicial Electronic Data Interchange in Europe Applications, Policies and Trends. Bologna: Lo Scarabeo. [Google Scholar]
- Cooper, Cary L. 1998. The changing nature of work. Community Work Family 1: 313–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fabri, Marco, and Philip M. Langbroek. 2000. The Challange of Change for Judicial System. Amsterdam: IOS Press. [Google Scholar]
- Fersini, Elisabetta, Enza Messina, Francesco Archetti, and Mauro Cislaghi. 2010. Semantics and machine learning: A new generation of court management systems. In International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering, and Knowledge Management. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. [Google Scholar]
- Gershowitz, Adam M. 2019. Criminal-Justice Apps. William & Mary Law School Research Paper, (09-387). Available online: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3330255# (accessed on 30 June 2021).
- Giffinger, Rudolf, and Nataša Pichler-Milanović. 2007. Smart Cities: Ranking of European Medium-Sized Cities. Vienna: Vienna University of Technology. [Google Scholar]
- Giffinger, Rudolf, Christian Fertner, Hans Kramar, and Evert Meijers. 2007. City-Ranking of European Me-Dium-sized Cities. Vienna: Vienna University of Technology. [Google Scholar]
- Glaser, Barney G. 1992. Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis. Mill Valley: Sociology Press. [Google Scholar]
- Greenfield, Adam. 2010. Everyware: The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing. Indianapolis: New Riders. [Google Scholar]
- Hamm, Marie Summerlin. 2013. Increasing Your “App” titude: Legal Research Apps for Virginia Practitioners. Virginia Lawyer 62: 45–48. [Google Scholar]
- Hanseth, Ole, and Kalle Lyytinen. 2016. Design theory for dynamic complexity in information infrastructures: The case of building internet. In Enacting Research Methods in Information Systems. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 104–42. [Google Scholar]
- Hanseth, Ole, and Margunn Aanestad. 2003. Design as bootstrapping. On the evolution of ICT networks in health care. Methods of Information In Medicine 42: 385–91. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Hanseth, Ole, and Nina Lundberg. 2001. Designing work oriented infrastructures. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 10: 347–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Horton, Joanne, Richard Macve, and Geert Struyven. 2004. Qualitative research: Experiences in using semi-structured interviews. In The Real Life Guide to Accounting Research. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 339–57. [Google Scholar]
- i Martínez, Agustí Cerrillo, and Pere Fabra i Abat. 2009. E-Justice: Information and Communication Technologies in the Court System. Hershey: Information Science Reference, IGI Global. [Google Scholar]
- Kallinikos, Jannis. 2009. Institutional complexities and functional simplification: The case of Money Claims Online. Service in England and Wales. In ICT and Innovation in the Public Sector. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 174–210. [Google Scholar]
- Keats, John. 1817. On Seeing the Elgin Marbles. Poetry Foundation 3: 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Kitchin, Rob. 2014. The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal 79: 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kourtit, Karima, Mark Deakin, Andrea Caragliu, Chiara Del Bo, Peter Nijkamp, Patrizia Lombardi, and Silvia Giordano. 2013. 11 An advanced triple helix network framework for smart cities performance. In Smart Cities: Governing, Modelling and Analysing the Transition. London: Routledge, pp. 196–216. [Google Scholar]
- Kummitha, Rama Krishna Reddy, and Nathalie Crutzen. 2017. How do we understand smart cities? An evolutionary perspective. Cities 67: 43–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lanzara, Giovan Francesco. 1993. Capacità Negativa: Competenza Progettuale e Modelli di Intervento nelle Organizzazioni. Bologna: Il Mulino. [Google Scholar]
- Lanzara, Giovan Francesco. 2009. Building digital institutions: ICT and the rise of assemblages in government. In ICT and Innovation in the Public Sector. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 9–48. [Google Scholar]
- Lanzara, Giovan Francesco. 2004. The Circulation of Agency in Judicial Proceedings: Designing for Interoperability and Complexity. In The Circulation of Agency in E-Justice: Interoperability and Infrastructures for European Transborder Judicial Proceedings. Edited by Francesco Contini and Giovan Francesco Lanzara. Dordrecht: Springer, vol. 13, pp. 3–32. [Google Scholar]
- Leorke, Dale, Danielle Wyatt, and Scott McQuire. 2018. More than just a library: Public libraries in the ‘smart city. City Culture and Society 15: 37–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leydesdorff, Loet, and Mark Deakin. 2011. The triple-helix model of smart cities: A neo-evolutionary perspective. Journal of Urban Technology 18: 53–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lupo, Giampiero. 2014. Law, technology and system architectures: Critical design factors for money claim and possession claim online in England and Wales. In The Circulation of Agency in E-Justice. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 83–107. [Google Scholar]
- Lupo, Giampiero, and Jane Bailey. 2014. Designing and implementing e-Justice Systems: Some lessons learned from EU and Canadian Examples. Laws 3: 353–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Maeda, John. 2006. The Laws of Simplicity. Cambridge: MIT Press. [Google Scholar]
- Manolova, Tatiana S., Rangamohan V. Eunni, and Bojidar S. Gyoshev. 2008. Institutional environments for entrepreneurship: Evidence from emerging economies in Eastern Europe. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 32: 203–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McIntosh, Michele J., and Janice M. Morse. 2015. Situating and constructing diversity in semi-structured interviews. Global Qualitative Nursing Research 2: 2333393615597674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mohr, Richard, and Francesco Contini. 2011. Reassembling the Legal: ‘The Wonders of Modern Science’in Court-Related Proceedings. Griffith Law Review 20: 994–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohr, Richard, and Francesco Contini. 2014. Conflicts and commonalities in judicial evaluation. Oñati Socio-legal Series 4: 5. [Google Scholar]
- Nam, Taewoo, and Theresa A. Pardo. 2011. Conceptualizing smart city with dimensions of technology, people, and institutions. Paper presented at the 12th Annual International Digital Government Research Conference: Digital Government Innovation in Challenging Times, College Park, MD, USA, June 12–15. [Google Scholar]
- Neirotti, Paolo, Alberto De Marco, Anna Corinna Cagliano, Giulio Mangano, and Francesco Scorrano. 2014. Current trends in Smart City initiatives: Some stylised facts. Cities 38: 25–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nucera, Sebastiano, Gennaro Tartarisco, Aldo Epasto, Donatello Smeriglio, Alessandro Mazzeo, Giovanni Pioggia, and Alessandra Anastasi. 2018. Ubiquitous, Wearable, Mobile: Paradigm Shifts in E-Learning and Diffusion of Knowledge. In Handbook of Research on Mobile Devices and Smart Gadgets in K-12 Education. Hershey: IGI Global, pp. 286–307. [Google Scholar]
- Orlikowski, Wanda J. 1992. The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization Science 3: 398–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Orlikowski, Wanda J. 2000. Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science 11: 404–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Potts, Jason R., Todd Griffith, Joseph J. Sharp, and Dan Allison. 2010. Subject matter expert-driven behavior modeling within simulation. Paper presend at the 2010 Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation and Education Conference (I/ITSEC), Orlando, FL, USA, November 29–December 2. [Google Scholar]
- Prior, Matthew, Farooq Akram, and Dimitri Mavris. 2011. An Application of Evidence Theory to Subject Matter Expert based Technology Portfolio Analysis. Paper presented at the Infotech@ Aerospace 2011, St. Louis, MI, USA, March 29–31. [Google Scholar]
- Rosa, João, Cláudio Teixeira, and Joaquim Sousa Pinto. 2013. Risk factors in e-justice information systems. Government Information Quarterly 30: 241–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schmidt, Christiane. 2004. The analysis of semi-structured interviews. A Companion to Qualitative Research 253: 258. [Google Scholar]
- Simon, Herbert A. 1962. New Developments in the Theory of the Firm. The American Economic Review 52: 1–15. [Google Scholar]
- Smith, Jonathan A. 1995. Semi structured interviewing and qualitative analysis. In Rethinking Methods in Psychology. Edited by Jonathan A. Smith, Rom Harre and Luk Van Langenhove. London: Sage Publications, pp. 9–26. [Google Scholar]
- Strauss, Anselm, and Juliet Corbin. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research Techniques. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
- Thompson, James D. 1967. Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory. Champaign: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership Historical Research Reference in Entrepreneurship. [Google Scholar]
- Toppeta, Donato. 2010. The smart city vision: How innovation and ICT can build smart,“livable”, sustainable cities. The Innovation Knowledge Foundation 5: 1–9. [Google Scholar]
- Velicogna, Marco. 2007. Justice systems and ICT-What can be learned from Europe. Utrecht Law Review 3: 129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Velicogna, Marco, and Francesco Contini. 2009. Assemblage-in-the-making: Developing the e-services for the Justice of the Peace Office in Italy. In ICT and Innovation in the Public Sector. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 211–43. [Google Scholar]
- Velicogna, Marco, Antoine Errera, and Stéphane Derlange. 2011. e-Justice in France: The e-Barreau experience. Utrecht Law Review 7: 163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Webster, Leonard, and Patricie Mertova. 2007. Using Narrative Inquiry as a Research Method: An Introduction to Using Critical Event Narrative Analysis in Research on Learning and Teaching. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
- Yin, Robert K. 1987. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 6th ed. Applied Social Research Methods Series; Beverly Hills: Sage, vol. 5. [Google Scholar]
- Yin, Robert K. 2003. Designing case studies. Qualitative Research Methods 5: 359–86. [Google Scholar]
1 | Lanzara (2014) stresses that successful ICT systems have to achieve the right balance between a system’s maximum level of feasible simplicity and its maximum level of manageable complexity. As Lanzara notes, systems that are simplified to a point that undermines the functionalities, value and usefulness are highly unlikely to attract users, and may in fact drive users to offline procedures (Lanzara 2014). On the other hand, systems cannot be so complex as to be beyond the technological capacity of most users. Designers, Lanzara argues, should take into account the two thresholds, and implement strategies for keeping systems in the space between the maximum manageable complexity and minimum feasible simplicity. |
2 | The Semi-structured interview involving the following arguments: role of interviewed; system description; system development; actors involved in development; test; system infrastructure; relationship with institutions; diffusion of the service. Average duration of the interview: 60 min. |
3 | The information provided in this section derives from the COLLEGA Official website (www.collegaonline.it; accessed on 30 June 2021) and from the semi-structured interview with the creator of the app. |
4 | The article 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the law 31 December 2012, n.247 establishes that lawyers can be replaced by another lawyer, with a verbal assignment, or by a qualified practitioner, with written authorization. |
5 | In Italy to become a lawyer and be registered in the bar association, it is necessary to carry out an internship of at least 18 month and a final exam. Lawyers enroll in the local bar association situated in the district of the court where the lawyer resides (Law 31 December 2012, n.247). |
6 | The app does not deduct the four free tasks if they are granted to favorites. |
7 | The counterparty and the judge have access to the shared report also outside COLLEGA through a PIN number communicated by the lawyer (www.collegaonline.it; accessed on 30 June 2021). |
8 | The information provided in this section derives from the ANTHEA Official website (www.progetto-anthea.com; accessed on 30 June 2021) and the semi-structured interview with the creator of the app. |
9 | In Italy, the Law n. 54 of 8 February 2006 disciplines the cases of minors’ maintenance in divorced couples. The fundamental principle is that, even in the event of the divorce of the parents, the minor child has the right to maintain a balanced and ongoing relationship with each of them, to receive care, education and instruction from both and to maintain meaningful relationships with the ancestors and with the relatives of each parental branch. |
10 | This combination of inductive and deductive methodology is at the basis of the grounded theory method of analysis. An in dept analysis of grounded theory concepts is out of the scope of the paper. However, it is worth mentioning that if on the one hand grounded theory provides the dictum that “there is a need not to review any of the literature in the substantive area under study” (Glaser 1992, p. 31) for fear of contaminating, constraining, inhibiting, stifling, or impeding the researcher’s analysis, on the other hand Strauss and Corbin supported an analysis based on previous theories given that the literature is able to provide examples of similar phenomena (ST). |
11 | Law n. 247 of 31 December 2012 and article 102 of the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure. |
12 | Italian lawyers registered to the national bar associations can defend before any district court in the Italian territory. However, lawyers, in order to defend before some superior courts (Constitutional Court, Supreme Court of Cassation, Council of State of the Italian Republic, Superior Court of Public Waters) have to be registered in the list of lawyers authorized to practice before higher jurisdictions (Law 247 of 31 December 2012). |
13 | Ibidem note 9. |
14 | Art. 7 of the law 20 November 1986 n. 890 on the notification by post disciplines on the use of registered letters as communication means with legal value. |
15 | Article 81 of the Italian Civil Procedure Code. |
1. | Role, training, and professional experience of the interviewee | 9. | User involvement |
2. | ICT literacy | 10. | Test policy |
3. | History of app development | 11. | System components |
4. | Barriers in development | 12. | User identification |
5. | Competences activated for development | 13. | E-payment |
6. | Relationship with public administration for app development | 14. | Security of systems |
7. | Other institutions and actors involved | 15. | Diffusion of system among users and effects on user work routines |
8. | Installed base components | 16. | Revenues from investments |
Theoretical Framework Factors of Analysis | |||
Factor | Definition | The Literature | Source |
Private initiative | Role of private initiative for innovation | The smart city literature and rationalist school | (Orlikowski 1992; Toppeta 2010; Neirotti et al. 2014; Giffinger et al. 2007) |
Stakeholders’ role | Involvement of stakeholders in technological development | The e-justice and smart city literature | (Mohr and Contini 2011; Agrawal and Vieira 2013; Andrade and Joia 2012; Lupo 2014; Bailey et al. 2013a) |
Triple-helix model | Role of industries, universities, and governments in technological innovation | The smart city literature | (Leydesdorff and Deakin 2011; Kummitha and Crutzen 2017; Calzada and Cobo 2015) |
Quadruple-helix model | Role of industries, universities, governments, and citizens in technological innovation | The smart city literature | (Nam and Pardo 2011) |
Negative capabilities | Capacity of private citizens to adapt and create useful practices, services, and routines in hostile environments | The ICT literature | (Ciborra and Lanzara 2017; Lanzara 1993) |
Analytical concepts derived from empirical analysis | |||
Factor | Definition | The Literature | Source |
Test policy | Reiterated tests involving users for stakeholders’ inclusion and acceptance of technology | The ICT and e-justice literature | (Bailey et al. 2013a) |
Self-reinforcing process | “Critical mass” of users as a significant factor in ICT growth | The ICT and e-justice literature | (Hanseth and Aanestad 2003) |
Maximum manageable complexity | Entanglements, investments, and maintenance costs considered tolerable in terms of affordability and sustainability | The ICT and e-justice literature | (Carnevali 2019) |
Incremental approach | Development through iterative process that incorporates feedback from key stakeholders | The ICT and e-justice literature | (Ciborra and Lanzara 2017; Lanzara 1993) |
Ubiquity of technologies | Human–technology interactions in which the user operates computing systems and equipment simultaneously without being aware that machines are performing tasks | The ICT literature | (Nucera et al. 2018) |
Installed base | Technological solutions, institutional arrangements, organizational practices, and legal frameworks that are already established when a new system is developed | The ICT and e-justice literature | (Hanseth and Aanestad 2003; Hanseth and Lundberg 2001; Ciborra and Lanzara 1994; Kallinikos 2009; Lanzara 2009; Lupo 2014; Velicogna and Contini 2009) |
Modularity | System development based on an infrastructure composed of different technological components | The ICT and e-justice literature | (Hanseth and Lyytinen 2016; Lanzara 2009; Lupo 2014) |
Assemblage structure | Integrated and different loosely coupled layers—organizational, technical, institutional, and regulative—connected to each other | The ICT and e-justice literature | (Cooper 1998; Lanzara 2009) |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Lupo, G.; Carnevali, D. Smart Justice in Italy: Cases of Apps Created by Lawyers for Lawyers and Beyond. Laws 2022, 11, 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws11030051
Lupo G, Carnevali D. Smart Justice in Italy: Cases of Apps Created by Lawyers for Lawyers and Beyond. Laws. 2022; 11(3):51. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws11030051
Chicago/Turabian StyleLupo, Giampiero, and Davide Carnevali. 2022. "Smart Justice in Italy: Cases of Apps Created by Lawyers for Lawyers and Beyond" Laws 11, no. 3: 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws11030051
APA StyleLupo, G., & Carnevali, D. (2022). Smart Justice in Italy: Cases of Apps Created by Lawyers for Lawyers and Beyond. Laws, 11(3), 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws11030051