• Second ‘Tech Circle’ focused on integrating new technologies and the associated challenges

Tech Circle, an initiative by lawyer and tech law speaker Thanuki Goonesinghe, returned for its second edition on 20 April, taking place at the Lakmahal Community Library, Colombo 3. The event focused on integrating new technologies in dispute resolution, with independent arbitrator attorney-at-law Amrit Rajapakse, accredited mediator attorney-at-law Saranee Gunathilaka, and legal consultant Ashvini Natesan sharing their views.

The session commenced with the speakers pointing out how far behind Sri Lanka is in terms of legal tech. “The ground reality, in my experience, is that there is very minimal use of any form of tech, with the exception of video conferencing. If we look at dispute resolution as it now functions, you have on the one hand litigation and then you have ADR, or alternative dispute resolution,” Rajapakse said.

“Under the ADR umbrella, you would have traditionally found negotiation, mediation, reconciliation, and arbitration, which is probably the most formal form of ADR. And of course there are some innovative things like expert determination and adjudication, which is very popular in the construction industry. That’s the range of options which are currently available if you have a dispute.”

Gunathilaka explained that efforts have been made to introduce technology into these areas of legal practice, sharing that back in 2017, she was part of an ADR conference, where discussions covered the introduction of a tech-based mediation platform where tools like artificial intelligence (AI) would be used. “But as we got into it, we realised that Sri Lanka was too young for it... even if we did find somebody to invest, we wouldn’t have been able to give them anything out of it at that point.”

Today, seven years since the conference, the country is making progress. “We are getting into the game right now, particularly on mediation, and even in terms of arbitration, I think Amrit Rajapakse would agree that we are trying to amend most things, and more people are invested in it.”

She added that the ADR landscape is becoming interesting; a shift from it’s previously laid back attitude where very few were talking about legal tech. Thus, it was now the right time to talk about it and think of new platforms or tools.

Challenges to tech adoption

Why then is there a delay in the adoption of technology in the legal sector? As Rajapakse pointed out, in terms of tech adoption, there’s a big difference between Sri Lanka and other countries. 

He said that the Commercial High Court, for instance, has introduced Zoom for certain basic applications, but sustainability is an issue, adding that as Gunathilaka had also pointed out, the moment funding from donor agencies ceases for a project or initiative, there was no mechanism in place to self-fund it.

This is, Rajapakse said: “although the courts are profit centres for the government because they earn a lot in terms of fines for the government, especially provincial revenue fines, which are collected by the magistrate’s courts. But all of that money is transferred to the Treasury, and courts depend on a shoestring budget from the ministry.”

He went on to say that he has seen so many initiatives begin with impressive infrastructure, but come to a halt within a few months. This ranges from air-conditioning to paperless courts, he said, adding that these interventions haven’t been sustainable thus far.

With regard to the paperless courts initiative, which fell apart as soon as funding ended, Rajapakse pointed out that there was also no demand since lawyers didn’t seem to take to it, pointing to a gap between what practitioners require and what is developed or implemented.

Cultural shift

Elaborating on the topic, Gunathilaka said that globally, tech adoption in dispute resolution is relatively new. 

“If you look at ADR and tech, there are certain softwares and platforms available but it’s a handful. And not everyone is actually convinced on all of them either. Most of those software have been developed on certain aspects of mediation, like consumer protection, which is a very famous area where they use legal tech, particularly through PayPal, eBay, Amazon, etc., which have had really good platforms where they use legal tech for ADR and make it more user friendly and accessible to people.”

She added that the growth of these legal tech platforms hasn’t been great, especially compared to tech that grew alongside them, like e-commerce platforms. She attributed this to the lack of a cultural change, where many are good at using mobile/smart phones, for instance, but only a small number use digital currency.

Gunathilaka explained that society is so used to a culture of having a day in court, that people are hesitant to move to a tech platform as many feel they won’t have justice until they’ve faced the court. And this, she said, was the biggest challenge faced by legal tech.

Gunathilaka emphasised that cultural change in terms of legal tech was a must.

However, while Sri Lanka may take time to adopt tech in the legal sphere, Gunathilaka pointed out that legal tech itself has a global demand, and so the tech industry shouldn’t feel discouraged. She used the example of online dispute resolution or ODR, which is a growing area.

“I know for a fact that Sri Lanka has some really good tech minds,” she said, adding: “If we talk about these things a little more in depth, there’s a chance for us to actually present something that’s good and functioning.”

Innovation and policy

Whether in Sri Lanka or overseas, the implementation and adoption of technology must be accompanied with policy and regulations. “Is legal tech good? Yes, but policy regulation is a must, particularly when we talk about data and so on,” Gunathilaka said.

Natesan touched on this topic, saying that focus has been drawn to how we can have laws that address the existing framework through which we use AI. “There are two schools of thought: one that says we need to have policies and the other that says it will stifle innovation, saying ‘let’s let technology grow and then talk about regulating’, but it’s about striking a balance.”

She added: “The legal tech we are using comes with a lot of challenges, so that is why conversations like this and having a policy that won’t stifle innovation are definitely important.”

The discussion went on to look at how the legal sector and the tech industry can work together to develop tools or platforms that can improve legal processes while also addressing barriers and challenges that prevent or delay the adoption of tech.

The speakers also looked at alternative dispute resolution, especially mediation, as a solution for tech startups, the need to encourage viewing business models from a legal perspective, having board mediators for companies, and the need to bring role models and champions from diverse fields to support capacity building.

Other topics discussed included using negotiation as a skill from the outset, as opposed to waiting for a dispute to happen, and international commercial courts, such as those in Singapore, which Sri Lanka should consider. 

The Tech Circle also highlighted the need for consistent awareness creation in order to create a cultural change, which would facilitate tech adoption in the legal arena.