Introduction to the Report

The Digitalising Justice: A Fundamental Rights-Based Approach report was published in 2025 by the European Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), which examines the digitalisation of justice and its impact on fundamental rights. Article 51(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union calls EU Member States to uphold the fundamental rights, including those related to the digitalisation of justice. The FRA’s purpose for this report is to aid national justice authorities and EU policy makers in integrating fundamental rights protections in the development and deployment of digital instruments that are transforming the justice sector.

The main focus of this report is the impact of digitalisation on the fundamental rights of the individuals who engage with the justice system (such as claimants, victims, defendants, etc.)  through the evaluation of 31 digital justice tools in use in different branches of justice by seven EU Member States including Austria, Estonia, France, Italy, Latvia, Poland, and Portugal. The selected states ensured the inclusion of experiences from different EU territories, with all of them paying substantial consideration to digitalisation in their current policy and legislation. The branches encompassed within the research include criminal, civil, and administrative justice to highlight to what extent the digitalisation of justice has advanced and where limitations persist. 

Additionally, the report is informed by a comprehensive fundamental rights examination of desk research and 208 semi-structured interviews with technical experts, judges, lawyers, court staff, prosecutors, civil society and law enforcement representatives, prison staff, and others (including court interpreters, academic experts, etc.). Research was conducted through FRA’s multidisciplinary network, Franet, which is used by the agency to collect detailed state-specific data. The report is heavily centred on what it defines as “use cases”, referring to  the applications within the civil, criminal, and administrative branches of justice across the states which are analysed. The first four chapters of the report focus on the examination of the following use case clusters representing the different purposes and uses of digital tools in the justice field:

1. Electronic Case Management or Filing Systems
2. Digital Tools that Facilitate People’s Access to Information or Engagement  with Justice Systems 
3. Videoconferencing Tools/Platforms in Court Proceedings
4. AI-Driven Tools or Systems

The analysis of each case includes an assessment of the risks and benefits of digitalisation on fundamental rights and focuses on five rights under the EU Fundamental Rights Charter, the rights to private life (Art. 7), protection of personal data (Art. 8), non-discrimination (Art. 21), fair trial and effective remedy (Art. 47), and the right of defence (Art. 48). Franet developed relevant country studies which include more details and a deeper analysis of each of the Member States included in the report, providing additional data beyond that included in the general report. The Italy country study report was developed by the contractor Fondazione Giacomo Brodolini (FGB), an Italian foundation with offices in Rome, Milan, Torino, Aosta, and Brussels. FGB provides research, consultancy, training, and innovation services,  supporting start-ups, facilitating access to funding opportunities, publishing research to inform policymaking, as well as managing projects. This article details the most relevant contents of Italy’s country report. 

Framework and Development of the Digitalisation of Justice 

The digitalisation of the Italian justice system is currently shaped by a rapidly evolving legal and policy framework, driven by both domestic reform and European-level commitments. Central to this transformation is the adoption of a fundamental rights-based approach, which seeks to reconcile efficiency gains in judicial administration with the protection of core procedural and substantive rights. In this sense, digitalisation is not merely a technical upgrade but a structural shift in the administration of justice.

A key driver of this transition has been the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNNR), which introduced binding milestones and targets for the modernisation of the justice sector. Within this framework, the 2022 Cartabia Reform represents a pivotal legislative development, marking a transition from experimental or voluntary digital practices to mandatory implementation. This reform requires electronic filing at all stages of proceedings, expands the use of remote hearings, and provides for mandatory digital sentencing. These measures are closely linked to broader policy objectives such as reducing trial length and improving procedural efficiency. Significant financial investment has supported this process, including over EUR 133 million allocated to the digitalisation of over 7.75 million files across various court levels.

The broader regulatory foundation is provided by the Digital Administration Code (CAD), which established general rules governing digital documents and their transmission across public administration. Together, these instruments form the backbone of Italy’s transition towards a digitally enabled justice system. Despite these advances, the development of digitalisation in Italy remains uneven across different areas of jurisdiction. The governance of digitalisation in the Italian justice system is characterised by a multi-layered institutional structure involving several bodies with  overlapping responsibilities. Within the Ministry of Justice, the Department for the Digital Transition of Justice plays a central coordinating role, supported by the Directorate General for Automated Information Systems (DGSIA), which is responsible for the technical implementation of digital infrastructure. At the national level, broader strategic direction is provided by the Department for Digital Transformation and the Interministerial Committee for Digital Transition. 

Monitoring mechanisms are closely linked to the PNRR, which requires periodic reporting on progress. Tools such as the ReGis management system enable the tracking of investments and legislative developments, complemented by reporting obligations to Parliament. The digitalisation of justice in Italy has significant implications for fundamental rights, particularly in relation to fair trial guarantees, data protection, and equality before the law. While digital tools may enhance efficiency and accessibility, they also alter the conditions under which justice is administered.

Italy's digitalisation efforts are also embedded within a broader European framework aimed at enhancing cross-border judicial cooperation. The implementation of systems such as the European Criminal Record Information System (ECRIS) and participation in projects supporting the development of e-CODEX infrastructure reflects a commitment to interoperability at the EU level. However, available evidence suggests that cross-border cooperation has not yet fully benefited from digitalisation to the same extent as domestic systems, indicating an area for further development.

The Four Use Cases

Electronic Case Management or Filing Systems

According to the Italy country report, these systems represent Italy’s most developed field in terms of the country’s judicial digitalisation, despite variations in different judicial branches. The report detailed the following cases within this area:

• The Electronic Civil Trial (Processo Civile Telematico - PCT)

The report defined the PCT as the most mature digital system in Italy, currently holding a status of full digitalisation across all branches and all stages of proceedings. The PCT allows for the electronic administration of civil cases and was expanded by the Cartabia Reform through the introduction of compulsory digital sentencing and remote hearings.

• Electronic Administrative Trial (Processo Amministrativo Telematico - PAT)

This system was established in January of 2017, and it oversees all new appeals lodged with the Council of State and Regional Administrative Courts. The PAT is regulated by Decree-Law n.168/2016, which mandates the guidelines on document formats, filing procedures, and the responsibilities of trial participants. 

• Electronic Criminal Trial (Processo Penale Telematic - PPT) and Electronic Criminal Trial Application (APP)

According to the report, the digitalisation of the criminal justice system has been measured and has encountered substantial pushback. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, a portal for digital filing was implemented in 2020, however the official PPT was created in 2022. Since January 2025, digital management is compulsory for most criminal procedures. The APP is the main database and tool for electronic criminal trial management, handling documents through various stages of a case. The APP has received severe criticisms by justice professionals due to its technical malfunctions and slowing down procedural operations and deficiencies regarding confidentiality. 

•  Electronic Filing in Juvenile Courts

This system became mandatory in 2023 and is an expansion of the PCT framework towards the juvenile civil justice sector. It employs the use of an application named “Select” for the creation and digital signing of PDF acts within the internal network of the Ministry of Justice. The report specified that this software was not specifically tailored to the needs of juvenile proceedings, as it had mostly been transferred from ordinary civil courts. This issue caused problems with how prosecutors received information from social services and resulted in legacy data kept in older manual systems being lost. 

•  Supporting and Private Platforms 

Some additional platforms emerged to bridge gaps in ministerial systems. One of them is the Unified Digital Platform for Lawyers (PDUA), which was activated by the Lawyers’ welfare fund in 2024 to facilitate their way of working. Another platform is Polisweb, which allows the consultation of registries and the scheduling of hearings with the PCT.

Digital Tools that Facilitate People’s Access to Information or Engagement with Justice Systems 

The report states that these tools are mainly directed toward voluntary jurisdiction and vulnerable social categories and they intend to narrow the “digital divide” through the provision of platforms that are easy to use, as well as human involvement in digital processes. The report identified the following cases:

• Proximity Offices (Uffici di Prossimità)

These service points operate at a local level and allow collaboration between municipalities, regional authorities, and the Ministry of Justice. These offices were established to counteract the abolition of many small courts after 2017, with approximately 85 offices being active in 16 regions as of 2024. They target vulnerable subjects that have difficulties with digital systems or travel, which are assisted by civil servants in lodging documents for voluntary jurisdiction without the strict requirement of a lawyer. 

• The MIGRANTES Project

This project was launched between 2015-2017 as an experimental pilot applied for the handling of increasing asylum applications in Catania’s Civil Court in Sicily. It digitalised communications between Civil Courts and Territorial Commissions and resulted in the creation of the Country-of-origin Information (COI) digital database. This feature allowed for judges and lawyers’ to have access to consistently updated information on applicants’ home countries to inform their decisions. This project resulted in an 86% increase in decided cases in 2016 alone, saving around EUR 70,000 in administrative costs during its first year. The project’s procedures have since been implemented into the PCT.

• Online Courts (Tribunale Online)

This initiative was introduced as a pilot in 2024 throughout seven judicial districts. It enables citizens that hold a digital identity, such as SPID, to independently file certain requests in voluntary jurisdiction proceedings as well as monitor their status through digital devices. Its purpose is to streamline access for certain users and reduce inflow to court registries. 

• The Office of the Digital Ombudsperson (Difensore Civico per il Digitale)

This office was introduced under the CAD, functioning as a central supervisory authority. The Ombudsperson’s website allows for citizens to directly report alleged digital citizenship rights or accessibility violations. The Ombudsperson has the capacity of implementing corrective measures and clarifying legal requirements in the cases where public administration websites or applications do not meet accessibility criteria.

Videoconferencing Tools/Platforms in Court Proceedings

The report highlights that videoconferencing has undergone a rapid expansion after the COVID-19 pandemic and Cartabia Reform, being considered as remote-justice tools such as the following:

• Multi Video-conferencing System (MVC)

The report identified this tool as the main platform being used in the Italian Judicial System. It is incorporated into courtrooms and provides safety to vulnerable individuals by allowing them to communicate with courts from safe and controlled environments. This system also allows detainees to participate in hearings from detention facilities, increasing security and lowering the risk in physical transfers to courtrooms. The MVC system also records remote and in-person hearings, providing a reviewable record of testimonies and evidence. This system was already introduced in 1989 for witness protection purposes, but has since been upgraded with a new platform in 2017. 

AI-Driven Tools or Systems

As the use of AI in the Italian justice system remains in its early stages, current developments focus mainly on support tasks and research projects. There has been collaboration between the Ministry of Justice and Microsoft leveraging advanced software for the automatic transcription of recorded court hearings. Predictive justice research has been developed through regional projects like ER4Justice in Emilia-Romagna, which analyse AI applications for predicting risks of crime and backlog management. It has also been alleged that judicial authorities and Italian police employ AI for facial recognition and evidence analysis in their investigations.

Final Remarks: Italy’s Performance and Fundamental Rights Implications of the Digitalisation of Justice 

The Italian framework for the digitalisation of justice reflects the prioritisation of digital reform. It has also been described as fragmented, raising concerns regarding coordination and consistency in implementation. Civil justice represents the most advanced domain, with the Electronic Civil Trial fully operational across jurisdictions and procedural stages. Its long-term development, dating back to the 1990s, has allowed for a relatively mature and stable system of digital case management. Despite its sophistication, different branches within civil justice employ systems that are not interoperable, affecting uniformity.

By contrast, as shown in the report, the digitalisation of criminal justice has progressed more slowly. The Electronic Criminal Trial, formally developed only in recent years, is still in the process of full implementation, with mandatory digital management of criminal proceedings introduced gradually. This slower pace reflects both technical challenges and deeper legal concerns, particularly regarding the compatibility of digital tools with specific guarantees required in criminal proceedings. Administrative justice, through the Administrative Electronic Trial, occupies an intermediate position, having been implemented in 2017 and providing a more structured but less extensive digital framework compared to civil justice. 

The increasing use of remote technologies in judicial proceedings illustrates this tension. Although such tools can facilitate participation and reduce delays, they may affect procedural principles such as orality and immediacy, especially in criminal proceedings. This raises concerns regarding the effective exercise of defence rights and the overall fairness of proceedings. At the same time, the expansion of digital systems involves extensive processing of personal data, bringing issues of privacy and data protection to the forefront. Oversight in this area is primarily exercised by the Italian Data Protection Authority, which has intervened in cases where digital tools were introduced without adequate prior assessment of their impact on fundamental rights. More broadly, the absence of a dedicated independent body specially tasked with monitoring these implications remains a notable gap.

In parallel with broader digitalisation efforts, Italy is exploring the potential role of artificial intelligence in the justice sector. Although AI systems are not currently used in core judicial decision-making, policy initiatives indicate a cautious but forward-looking approach. As mentioned in the country report, the Italian Strategy for Artificial Intelligence 2024-2026 identifies opportunities to enhance administrative efficiency and access to justice. At the legislative level, draft provisions limit the use of AI to support functions, such as organisational tasks or the analysis of case law, while reaffirming that judicial decision-making must remain exclusively within the competence of human judges. Despite this cautious approach, the report highlights that concerns remain regarding the potential long-term implications of AI, including risks related to the standardisation of judicial reasoning, the handling of sensitive data, and the possible impact on judicial independence.

The final observations made about the Italian case in the FRA report conclude that there has been a successful growth in administrative efficiency when it comes to the digitalisation of the justice system. However, Italy has regularly disregarded practical needs of legal personnel, as well as the protection of particular fundamental rights. No thorough fundamental rights assessment was conducted before the implementation of these digital tools, with authorities neglecting potential risks to fundamental rights. Although Italy demonstrated significant improvements and advances, a truly successful performance will require future efforts to employ a human-centred approach that guarantees that technology does not replace fundamental guarantees of justice, but serves as a support mechanism.