Legal Information Model
Section 3 proposed a general approach for handling case information. This section 4 describes specific, often shorter term, opportunities for improving information flows. Some of these relate to case information (which in the longer term could form part of a Workflow solution); other opportunities described in this section relate to different types of information (eg relating to property contracts or legislation).
4.1 suggests some opportunities which may result from the recent implementation of the Magistrates Court system. 4.2 lists cases where security issues may need to be considered if sending information electronically. 4.3 describes issues relating to some transfers of information between Jersey and the UK and other jurisdictions. 4.4 concerns the Public Registry system. 4.5 gives two non-electronic information issues.
4.1 From Magistrates Court
4.1.1 To Viscount’s Department
4.1.2 To Probation
4.1.3 To TABS and Registry Trust
4.2 Information Security
4.2.1 Charge Sheet
4.2.2 Pre-Sentencing Reports from Probation
4.2.3 Other Pre-Sentencing Reports
4.2.4 Criminal Record Information
4.3 Inter-Jurisdiction
4.3.1 National Police Computers in Scotland, N.I. and Eire
4.3.2 National Police Computer in Portugal
4.3.3 Probation Service and Home Office
4.3.4 Home Office Review of Legislation for Privy Council
4.4 Public Registry Index and Document Enrolment system (PRIDE)
4.4.1 Monthly List of Property Transactions
4.4.2 Further Links to PRIDE
4.4.3 Automatic Release of New Property Contracts into PRIDE
4.5 Non-Electronic Information Flows
4.5.1 Leaflets for CAB
4.5.2 Warning HM Prison of New Arrivals
The recent implementation of the COURAS system for the Magistrates Court opens the way for greater electronic communication to and from the Court. It is recommended that the following possibilities be considered, to see if they are feasible as improvements which can be made now (as well as elements of any future Workflow system as described in 3.5 - 3.6).
The Viscount’s Department use a system of double entry of Court information into their Court Enforcement System. Their Court Officer notes decisions of the Court (remand, bail, fines, imprisonment etc.) and transactions undertaken (such as receiving bail or fine money), and enters these into the system on return to the Department. The Magistrates Court Greffe later send the Court papers which confirm this information (such as written up Charge Sheets and Acts of Court), and separate Viscount’s Department staff use these to check the entries and enter a code to action them in the Court Enforcement System. This double entry began as a financial audit requirement, but was retained and expanded because of the large volume and speed at which the Court Officer has to work and the importance of absolute accuracy in dealing with Court Enforcement issues.
Although the feasibility has not been examined, if the Magistrates Court Greffe could send the Court documents electronically to the Court Enforcement System, there might be scope for removing one of the clerical inputs to the system. If this did not prove practical under present circumstances, it would certainly comprise a potential information flow under the Workflow approach proposed in 3.5 - 3.6 above.
For a new case in the Magistrates Court, the Probation Officer in Court uses information from the Charge Sheet to enter "front page" information to the Probation Service system ICMS (using the terminal in the Probation Service room in the Court building). There is again clearly scope for electronic transmission of this information from COURAS, as there is also for transmitting an Act of Court with a Probation or Community Service order to the Probation Service, and communicating other sentences to Probation for information concerning their clients.
Acts of Court recording civil judgements against companies are sent to Trade Advisory Bureau Services and to Registry Trust. Again there could be scope for electronic transmission.
This section lists four types of document which we are aware are currently sent in paper form, where other forms of transmission might not currently be used because of concern about the security of the private or sensitive nature of the contents.
There are a range of methods which can be used to guarantee security of electronic transmission, such as encryption (encoding of the data before it is sent in such a way that only the legitimate recipient will have the facility to decode), which could be used in these cases.
More generally, it is recommended that in implementing the recommendations in section 3 to move towards the goal of "end to end" case handling, at each point of information exchange between different systems, the appropriate level of security should be considered and provided; and that the security measures should be made clear to participants in order to allay any concerns or obstacles to moving forward.
The Magistrates Court Greffe distribute a number of copies of Charge Sheets to officers of different organisations in Court, and a very limited number beyond. Although the Charge Sheet is a public document, it is not wished for it to be seen too widely, and so for example it would never be faxed. When electronic transmission becomes possible, eg to the Police Admin Support Unit (ASU), it is recommended that security measures such as encryption be considered to allay any security concerns about emailing it. Alternatively, Police ASU could be given read-only access to COURAS, again with appropriate security.
Pre-Sentencing Reports from the Probation Service are currently made available in hard copy only, in sealed envelopes, for collection (eg by the Defence Advocate) from the Probation Office (or from the Law Officers’ Department in a Royal Court case). This can be inconvenient and electronic transmission would be helpful - the Probation Service may already be considering this. They are concerned about the security of their reports because of the degree of sensitive information they can contain, so it is recommended that security measures such as encryption be examined to facilitate this.
The same recommendation may be applicable to other Pre-Sentencing Reports (from Drug & Alcohol Service, Psychological Services, Psychiatric Services, etc.)
The Police ASU send criminal record information to agencies (eg Probation Service) as part of criminal proceedings, and also as a service to a variety of organisations (eg for employment checks). When Police ASU obtain email facilities, it is recommended that they consider encryption or other security measures if there are concerns to be addressed about sending such information by email. The Probation Service (for example) would find receipt by email more convenient.
This study has not focused on legal processes regarding relationships with other jurisdictions. However, the following points were noted.
ASU have direct access to the PNC (Police National Computer) which covers England, Wales and the Channel Islands, for obtaining up-to-date information on criminal records.
Access to the Scottish, Northern Irish and Irish equivalents is by phone/fax requests, with reply by fax. Under current circumstances email communication would not be seen as a great improvement; however, it is recommended that this be considered as it will bring greater benefits when the Police use electronic transmission more widely to other Jersey agencies, as criminal records could then simply be forwarded by email. (See also 4.2.4 and 6.5.)
More significantly, Police ASU have great difficulty obtaining information from the Portuguese equivalent, despite the fact that 10% of the population is Portuguese. The only access is via Interpol, which takes 2-3 weeks to action. Although outside the purview of this report, we are informed that better access would be very helpful.
An email link to the Home Office could be of benefit to the Probation Service. When a prisoner is released from a UK prison for post-custodial supervision in Jersey, there have been occasions when the file has arrived at the Jersey Probation Service after the released prisoner has arrived - therefore it is possible that electronic transmission of information between the Home Office and Probation might improve this.
Principal legislation approved by the States of Jersey is forwarded through diplomatic channels to the Home Office where it is reviewed in preparation for Royal sanction in the Privy Council. This process can take some time. It may be that this process could be expedited by forwarding an electronic copy to the Home Office, in parallel with the formal forwarding of the Act and Attorney General’s report through diplomatic channels, to give notice of the impending arrival of the diplomatic package and informally to initiate the process at the Home Office, if this were acceptable to diplomatic protocol.
Regarding both 4.3.3 and 4.3.4, the relationship between the States and the Home Office is clearly outside the scope of this report, but it is recommended that these two areas are explored with the Home Office. Forwarding an email along the route of the normal diplomatic channels might be another alternative.
This list is printed from PRIDE by the Public Registry and sent to a number of subscribers each month, eg each Parish (who update their records for Rates). Recommendation: This is another hard copy communication which could at an appropriate point be changed to electronic (email) for those subscribers who can receive it.
The following additional organisations might benefit from electronic access to the PRIDE system for the Public Registry:
· Housing Department;
· Archive Services, for index to the archived Registry (when scanning has been complete and the original records are archived);
· Viscount’s Department, who currently sometimes have to telephone the Registry to request information;
· Property Services;
· and of course further Law Firms involved in conveyancing which are not yet using the PRIDE system.
We understand that there is a facility to allow lawyers to enter details of a property contract into the PRIDE system in their own office (as a private document initially not accessible by others), then released through the system to the Public Registry when the contract has been enacted in Court. This facility is not yet being used.
Jersey Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) automatically receive new and updated information leaflets from a number of organisations (eg Employment & Social Security Department), whereas in other cases they periodically visit, check and collect leaflet stocks. It is recommended that JLIB sends a request to such organisations, particularly those within the legal system or government, to add CAB to their mailing lists for when new leaflets are published.
Since arrest orders may be implemented at any time, it may sometimes happen that prisoners arrive at HM Prison without being expected. It is recommended that, where this is likely to be the case, at least a telephone call is made from the Police Court Unit or a Viscount’s Officer, as appropriate, to forewarn the Prison that a prisoner is on the way.