Turkeys transformation of the data aspect of its judicial system has resulted in a service that is faster, more transparent and more cost efficient, said judge Servet Gul, head of information technologies at the ministry of justice, speaking at a UN meeting. Advanced video conferencing facilities also mean there is less need to transfer prisoners to court. The system has nearly 2 million users, had led to savings of $100m and has created a virtually paperless working environment , so is greener, too. In Australia, the federal court was the first judicial setting to put in place electronic court files, and is now seen as global leader in how to manage digitised court documents. Australia is now moving on to upload all administrative records in its various registries. While the US is clearly an altogether bigger and more diverse jurisdiction, many state courts there are also on their way to become paperless, with an obligation for lawyers to electronically file documents that judges can access via laptops and other devices, explains Dr Judith Townend, director of Information Law and Policy Centre at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, University of London. In addition, she observes, the US supreme court is planning to introduce full electronic filing of different types of motions and applications, with free public access to these materials on the courts website though it seems that once bedded in, paper filing will still be required , which will perhaps somewhat frustrate the intentions of modernisers. Training can be an issue, as it requires judges and lawyers who may already be overstretched to take time out. There can also be capacity issues. In India, for instance, there is only a single training centre working to support professionals wanting to learn more about the practice and principals underpinning the delivery of e-courts.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit https://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2017/jan/16/online-justice-courts-explore-digital-possibilities
Blocked many good drugs. ONeill, a managing director at Thiels Mithril Capital Management, served in George W. Bushs administration as principal associate deputy secretary in the Department of Health and Human Services. Allowing the FDA toapprove drugs based only on safety, as ONeill has suggested, would be a setback for the agency and for health, Ovid Therapeutics Inc. Chief Executive Officer Jeremy Levin said in an interview.One of the FDAs most important functions is determining whether drugs work, he said. Insurer Oversight If there is any attempt to change the mission of the FDA — in other words, to prove both safety and efficacy — then Americas primacy in drug discoveries will suffer, Levin said. Any person who comes to run it needs to understand the value of clinical trials, the value of not just proving safety, but proving efficacy. Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. will continue developing drugs with the expectation that the FDA wont change its mission, said Ramona Sequeira, president of U.S. operations for the Japanese drugmaker. Full ArticleWe spend a lot of time testing both the efficacy and safety of our drugs and have a full expectation to demonstrate both, she said in an interview. Limiting FDAs purview to drug safety is worth exploring, said Mark Baum, CEO of San Diego-based Imprimis Pharmaceuticals Inc., which makes compounded drugs.Insurers, the gatekeepers for much of patient care, already monitor drug efficacy, he said. There is some wisdom in thinking about whether we want the FDA in the efficacy business at all, he said in an interview.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://washpost.bloomberg.com/Story?docId=1376-OJXIYZ6JIJUW01-68EV0M5P0PQ0FK4OP00GPG77UH