The extended lock down of businesses due to the Corona virus has given a boost to the use of Digital Media for interaction. Even the Courts which were hesitant to use video conferencing despite repeated nudges from experts and easy availability of solutions have now yielded and would be using video conferencing for court hearings.
Naavi had been promoting the ODR (Online dispute resolution) system through www.odrglobal.in which used the video conferencing along with Section 65B certification to ensure that the sessions are legally admissible as evidence.
Presently the Supreme Court is working on a procedure for E-Hearings and it can directly adopt the procedure suggested by the undersigned in odrglobal.in. Apart from what is presented in the website of ODR Global, Naavi had presented a E-Court system which had been taken to the Technical committee of the Supreme Court by one of the partners.
I would like the Supreme Court and any service provider who would like to structure the service to the Court to go through the following three links for an understanding of the suggested methodology.
Link 1: Link to the service page in arbitration.in website
Link 2: The link to the demo page with DSC based log in was also provided as indicated here.
Link 3: The dummy court room/arbitration room was indicated here.
The above web pages were created long time back (The domain name arbitration.in was created some time in 2005). The demo itself was made to the Supreme Court perhaps some time in November 2010 when the undersigned was ready with the prototype. (The actual presentation was made by a representative of E Mudhra/3i-CSL and I was not allowed to directly meet the committee. Whoever made the presentation did not succeed in convincing the committee).
The tragedy was that neither the Courts nor the IT savvy companies could foresee the potential of what I was suggesting. Even when I relaunched the online arbitration service as ODRGLOBAL (www.odrglobal.in) there are still techies and legal experts who are unable to see the utility of the system.
It is therefore a good feeling now that at least after 10 years since the idea was first promoted, and thanks to Corona, the Supreme Court is considering some mechanism for online hearings.
However, I am still convinced that the Court and their advisers may not appreciate the need for digitally signed log in and Section 65B certification that the service presented by me involved.
I can still claim the IPR for this combination of using the website, video conferencing, digital signature based log in and Section 65B certification as a solution which can be used either for E Courts or for private arbitrations. If some company is interested in developing this service on commercial basis, I can provide the necessary assistance.
I was forced to look back on this history because my attention was drawn to the use of digital signatures in the current corona crisis. I will express my views on the digital signature in the following article.
Naavi
