translated from Spanish: so will be lawsuits and judgments in the new normal

To avoid agglomerations in the courts and reduce the risk of COVID-19 contagion in the so-called “new normal”, the country’s judiciary prepares special measures ranging from providing only pre-appointment care and reducing capacity in buildings, to implementing online demand systems.
Among these options are contrasting realities. While at the federal level and in five entities in the country it is already possible to conduct an online trial from start to finish, there are 16 states where the initial lawsuit cannot even be emailed.
But there is also a common denominator: opacity in the criminal issue.  Not a single state that has enabled online audiences allows the general public to connect and witness them, even though the Constitution sees it as a basic principle.
Read: No food buffet and check-in, so will the events and expos in the new normal
A study by the organizations Transparency Mexicana and TOJIL A.C. reveals the advances of the judiciary throughout the country in the implementation of mechanisms that allow the population to securely access their services in the context of the “new normality”.
The analysis focuses its assessment on the option of “digital or remote justice”, which has been promoted as the main alternative by the Federal Judiciary and the powers of various states to restart lawsuits and judgments in all matters in the safest way possible.
How do online trials work? Estefanía Medina, a law specialist and CO-founder TOJIL says that each state judiciary has its variants, but can be summarized mainly in three steps:
The first is the option of being able to formally file the lawsuit over the internet. There are states that have created specific procedures for this while others allow it via email. 
The second step is to be able to follow the online process, which means that once the lawsuit is filed you can continue to carry out formalities or consult notifications. To do this, the user is granted a password, or the electronic signature of the Treasury (FIEL) or the FIREL signature that has been used for a long time in the Federal Judiciary can be used.
Read: ‘New Normal’ in CDMX: COVID case tracking, disease census and business surveillance
And the third step is that the possibility of being able to hold online hearings with the judge and the parties involved is also enabled. This is through videoconferences for which passwords are also granted to users.
Online justice: options that contrast
The study reveals that there are five states where the civil, family and commercial justice process has been fully digitized and it is now possible to file a lawsuit, follow-up and conduct trial hearings online. This is Nuevo León, Coahuila, state of Mexico, Puebla, Tamaulipas.  
They are joined by the Federal Judiciary where protection trials can also be promoted in this way.
On the other hand, there are three entities – Veracruz, Baja California and Guerrero – where it is possible to file the lawsuit and follow up later through the internet, but without it being possible to conduct online hearings.
In Mexico City, Querétaro, Quintana Roo and Sinaloa are allowed to file the lawsuit online in some cases, but the rest of the procedure is face-to-face. In Yucatan, remote filing and the possibility of conducting videoconference hearings have been enabled, but there is no system to follow up on the process procedures digitally.
There are four states where it is not possible to digitally perform any of the three steps referred to according to the study: Hidalgo, Campeche, Morelos and Chiapas. However, Hidalgo’s judiciary told Political Animal are in preparation for this, and while Morelos explained that some alternative services have been enabled.
Medina stresses that it is desirable for the judiciary of all states to facilitate and simplify the filing and monitoring of remote demands not only because of the current health crisis but to facilitate access to justice in Mexico.
Find out: AMLO calls to overcome the fear of going out on the street, because we need to get back to normal
“The easier it is to agree to file lawsuits, the more participation will be to bring access to justice to more people. In addition, security is improved by not only having physical records that can be lost or damaged but digital records that have a backup. There is also a favorable ecological impact as less paper is spent,” she said.
The alternative: attending with appointments and interspersing courts
There are states that, even though they have not digitized all procedures, have sought alternatives to avoid crowds in the courthouses.
In Morelos, for example, the judiciary of the entity launched a system through which an appointment is requested via email to go to file the lawsuit or carry out some other procedure. This seeks to distribute the amount of population that is presented evenly.
“The appointments that allow us is an orderly assistance and in turn avoid crowds. We already have a well-established methodology for this and we have an attendance control. This in addition to all the health measures,” he said in an interview with Political Animal the Presiding Magistrate of the Superior Court of Morelos, Rubén Jasso Díaz.
The magistrate explained that while online trials cannot be made in his state as legal reforms are required to do so, if there are some side proceedings that are worked by videoconference such as the coexistence of parents with minors in family trials, or mediation procedures between the parties in criminal matters. 
Another example is Mexico City where the facilities of the courts will be reopened from July 1. To prevent crowds, as in Morelos, an electronic appointment application system will be implemented to make it easy to space on people’s attendance.
But in addition in civil and family courts will operate an alternate care plan which is that a court will work with open doors one day and the next will do so behind closed doors (without receiving people), and the adjoining one will do it the other way around. This seeks to reduce face-to-face traffic by 50% on the premises.
You may be interested: Afraid to go after confinement? What is cabin syndrome and what we can do
In addition, restrictive measures such as limiting the transit of persons outside the processes that are carried out that day, the installation of health filters, continuous reviews, the mandatory use of head coverings, among others.
Hidalgo’s judiciary has also enabled similar options. The President and the Commission on the Planning and Creation of New Bodies, Hibels José Luis Crespo, explained in a paper sent to Political Animal who implemented an electronic appointment agenda that will allow people to sort out by schedule and avoid crowds.
In addition, as in Morelos, the possibility of carrying out-of-court mediations to reach agreements between parties and avoid trials has been enabled through videoconference.
Finally, Crespo emphasized that in Hidalgo working on the implementation of the advanced electronic signature platform that will allow as already happens in other state judicial powers can be followed up processes and demands remotely.
Political Animal he also sought out the judiciary of Campeche and Chiapas who according to the analysis of the organizations have no advances in digital justice, but until the closing of this text there has been no answer.
All remote: expensive and not always desirable
Some of the country’s judicial powers have argued that the transition from a face-to-face justice system to an all-digital one is a complex and costly process in the context of the resources they have.
“Approximately 26 local judiciary has little technology to fully address online justice, which requires even to be implemented, of a legislative issue in the Union Congress”, says Commissioner Crespo of the Hidalgo Judiciary.
The Presiding Magistrate of the Tribunal de Morelos, Rubén Jasso Díaz, agreed that the scarcity of resources is a challenge as significant technical adjustments are required. In Morelos, for example, there are projects to implement online consultation systems, but it will require congressional approval and specific budget approval for it.
But beyond technical and budget obstacles, Jasso Díaz said that there are processes that by their nature should not be entirely remote. For example, unlike amparo trials that are almost always documentary, in family or civil trials it is important for the judge to be able to verify the actions of the parties involved.
“There are subjects where it is essential to vent testimonies, to vent face-to-face trials. And one of the principles of systems is for the judge to be present. How will you realize, for example, that a witness is taught only with a camera? There are audiences that shouldn’t just be virtual” Jasso said.
What is essential to advance in all judicial powers, the magistrate noted, is in the digitization of the files. In Morelos he said that for years he managed to get to business matters, but those of other matters are missing. “We’re working on it, but it takes time and resources,” he said.
Criminal: forget transparency and publicity
The report of Transparency Mexicana and TOJIL warns of a serious fact: although 17 states and the Federal Judiciary have enabled the possibility of conducting criminal hearings online, virtually none have contemplated that the general public – and not just the parties – can follow them.
This is relevant since the Constitution raises the publicity of proceedings as a basic principle of the criminal system. Prior to the pandemic, that was implemented allowing the general public to access the hearing rooms. By transiting into online trials, this possibility has been excluded.
The only exception is the Coahuila Judiciary, which does provide that the general public can review criminal hearings. However, this will materialize with videos that will be uploaded later, but not as a real-time trace.
For Estefanía Medina this is yet another sign that there is no real commitment to fully materialize the publicity of audiences, a situation that not only generates a negative consequence on issues of transparency, but can jeopardize the legality of the processes.
“We don’t just talk about the lack of oversight that this entails. What happens here is that it is being broken with what the Constitution marks and we have to see if that does not cause these hearings to be declared inappropriate.  The system is put at risk,” he said.
What we do in Animal Político requires professional journalists, teamwork, dialogue with readers and something very important: independence. You can help us keep going. Be part of the team.
Subscribe to Animal Politics, receive benefits and support free journalism #YoSoyAnimal.

Original source in Spanish