COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS DigitalJustice@2030
Date: 2025-11-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, access to information, artificial intelligence, digital transformation, digitisation, electronic government, information technology applications, judicial proceedings, legal system, video conference

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 20.11.2025  COM(2025) 802 final  COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS DigitalJustice@2030  
 
 
DigitalJustice@2030 

The EU’s competitiveness will increasingly depend on the digitalisation of all sectors, which 
will drive investment.1 Digitalisation and the deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) will be 
essential to the ability of public authorities to deliver high-quality public services, notably also 
in the field of justice. Europe’s Digital Decade is underway with the ambition that by 2030 the 
EU  has  all  key  public  services  available  online.  The  ultimate  aim  will  be  to  increase  the 
efficiency of public services by making them digital by default, stimulating productivity.2  

Businesses are more likely  to  invest in  countries in  which the justice systems are  effective, 
where access to justice is guaranteed, the quality of justice is high, and transparency is ensured. 
The  efficient  delivery  of  justice  also means  that litigation  costs  are  less  for  individuals  and 
businesses.  These  resources  can  instead  be  used  for  investment  and  other  more  productive 
purposes. This is even more evident in cross-border cases where digital tools can considerably 
reduce  administrative  burden,  minimise  delays,  and  break  down  language  barriers  with AI-
based applications, such as speech-to-text conversion and transcription, machine translation, 
leading to cost savings.  

Digitalised justice systems are also expected to be more resilient in times of crisis. This was 
illustrated  by  the  Covid-19  pandemic.  The  quality  of  justice  may  also  increase  as  justice 
professionals  can  focus  more  on  their  core  task  of  delivering  justice.  The  digitalisation  of 
justice systems has the potential to deliver faster and simpler access to justice, bringing it closer 
to  people.3  For  instance,  digital  tools  can  provide  swift  access  to  courts  through 
videoconferencing, regardless of the distance from a courtroom. Having online access to case 
files also increases transparency as individuals, businesses and legal representatives can follow 
judicial proceedings more easily.4 
The adoption of the Digitalisation Regulation5 in 2023 marked a milestone in this respect. In 
24 cross-border civil, commercial and criminal judicial procedures,  the regulation mandates 
the  use  of  digital  communication.  The  Digitalisation  Regulation  also  provides  an  EU  legal 
framework for the use of videoconferencing to conduct  remote hearings in civil and certain 
criminal law matters.  

The Commission  must adopt  a series of  implementing acts  between 2026 and  2029  to help 
Member States adapt their national IT systems and ensure interoperability as required by the 
Digitalisation Regulation. A European Electronic Access Point will be operational as of 2028 
where users can lodge certain claims and request certificates and attestations.6 A decentralised 
IT system should be operational for all procedures within the scope of the regulation by the 
beginning of 2031. A coordinated and sustained effort  by the Commission and the Member 
States is necessary for the timely implementation of the Digitalisation Regulation as well as 

1 Draghi Report ‘The future of European competitiveness – Part B: In-depth analysis and recommendations’, p. 
67. 
2 COM(2021)118 final - 2030 Digital Compass: the European way for the Digital Decade, p. 10.  
3 Council e-Justice Strategy 2024-2028 (C/2025/437), 4th para. 
4 Supported by findings in the report ‘Digitalising justice: a fundamental rights-based approach’ by the European 
Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. 
5 Regulation (EU) 2023/2844 on the digitalisation of judicial cooperation and access to justice in cross-border 
civil, commercial and criminal matters, and amending certain acts in the field of judicial cooperation. 
6  Such  as  attestations  for  marriage  and  registered  partnerships,  or  certificates  for  protection  measures  in  civil 
matters.  

1 

 
 
 
 
the other decentralised IT systems established recently under five other legal acts concerning 
justice.7 

Digitalisation can also contribute to the fight against crime in the EU. Prosecution offices at 
EU  and  national  level  can  use  digital  tools  to  significantly  speed  up  communication  and 
cooperate more efficiently in the fight against cross-border crime. The EU’s Justice and Home 
Affairs agencies and bodies8 in charge of investigating and prosecuting crimes or supporting 
national prosecution services can similarly benefit from digitalisation, by using tools to share 
information faster, and tools to support national competent authorities.  

While harvesting the efficiency gains of digitalisation, potential risks also need to be mitigated. 
The use of digital tools in justice matters must fully respect the rule of law and fundamental 
rights, as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and relevant EU secondary 
legislation.9  In  addition,  the  AI  Act10  stipulates  that  only  AI  systems  which  do  not  harm 
fundamental  rights  may  be  used. At  the  same  time,  given  the  importance  to  ensure  that  all 
individuals11 residing in the EU have effective access to justice on an equal basis, non-digital 
channels for accessing justice should remain available. 

More digitalised justice systems may also be vulnerable to personal data breaches and cyber-
attacks.  While  paper-based  systems  have  other  vulnerabilities  such  as  limited  sharing, 
difficulties to update, particular attention must be paid to data privacy and security. The General 
Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)12 and the Law Enforcement Directive13 are cornerstone 
pieces  of  EU  legislation  which  aim  to  protect  people  against  these  risks,  through  risk 
management  measures  and  incident  reporting.  The  EU  Cybersecurity Act14  also  raises  the 
cybersecurity  level  of  information  and  communication  technology  products  in  the  EU, 
including for products used in the justice sector. 

Funding  the  digital  transition  of  national  justice  systems  may  imply  a  significant  upfront 
investment, but the related costs will be amortised over time as efficiency gains will lead to 
savings. While EU funds cannot cover all upfront costs, they can provide targeted support for 
tailored  investments  under  the  current  multiannual  financial  framework  (MFF)  and  for 

7 Regulation (EU) 2020/1784 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil 
or commercial matters (service of documents) (recast), Regulation (EU) 2020/1783 on cooperation between the 
courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters (taking of evidence) (recast), 
Regulation  (EU)  2023/1543  on  European  Production  Orders  and  European  Preservation  Orders  for  electronic 
evidence in criminal proceedings and for the execution of custodial sentences following criminal proceedings, 
Regulation (EU) 2024/3011 on the transfer of proceedings in criminal matters and Regulation (EU) 2023/2131 as 
regards digital communication channels in terrorism cases. 
8  Europol,  the  European  Union Agency  for  Criminal  Justice  Cooperation (Eurojust),  and  the  European  Public 
Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO). 
9 Such as Directive 2012/13/EU on the right to information in criminal proceedings. 
10 Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (AI Act). 
11 This includes persons with limited digital literacy, persons with disabilities that make it difficult to navigate 
digital tools and environments unassisted and persons who, for instance for reasons of economic deprivation, have 
no access to appropriate digital infrastructure. 
12 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data 
and on the free movement of such data (General Data Protection Regulation). 
13 Directive (EU) 2016/680 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by 
competent  authorities  for  the  purposes  of  the  prevention,  investigation,  detection  or  prosecution  of  criminal 
offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data. 
14 Regulation (EU) 2019/881 on ENISA (the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity) and on information and 
communications technology cybersecurity certification (Cybersecurity Act). 

2 

 
 
 
investments and reforms according to national and regional partnership plans when the next 
MFF starts.15 In addition, they can also create a leveraging effect on national budgets.16  

Strengthening  the  digital  skills  of  justice  professionals  will  be  essential  to  benefiting  from 
digitalisation and harnessing advanced technologies as a driver of the EU’s competitiveness.17 
That is why DigitalJustice@2030 has been adopted together with the new European Judicial 
Training  Strategy18  (2025-2030),  which  focuses  on  digitalisation,  creating  the  necessary 
supportive environment to turn it into reality.  
Competitiveness is front and centre of this Commission’s mandate.19 The EU must go faster 
and further to ensure competitiveness, prosperity and fairness.20 This stance is supported by the 
Council which calls for decisive action to boost competitiveness.21 DigitalJustice@2030 builds 
on these policy goals and translates the priorities set by the Council in its e-Justice Strategy 
2024-2028,22 and the Council conclusions on the use of AI in justice23 into concrete actions.  

DigitalJustice@2030 builds on the discussions with Member States and key stakeholders in the 
High-Level Fora on Justice for Growth and on the Future of EU Criminal Justice, highlighting 
initiatives on digitalisation which were widely supported24 and that are intended to increase the 
uptake of digital technologies, including AI, in justice systems by 2030. 

1.  Mapping  progress  of  national  digitalisation  of  justice  and  exchange  of  best 

practices 

The 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard25 shows that Member States are progressing unevenly in the 
digitalisation of their national justice systems. The reasons for these differences vary between 
Member States but include availability of human and financial resources as well as diverging 
political priorities.  

While the EU Justice Scoreboard provides some data on the level of digitalisation of national 
justice  systems  in  the  Member  States,  there  is  no  overview  of  national  initiatives  or  tools. 
Member States need the same or similar IT tools and data standards to digitalise practices that 
are common to all national justice systems. Member States interested in using solutions that 
are effective in other Member States may face difficulties in accessing the information.  

To tackle this issue, the Commission, together with the Council, started to map relevant national 
initiatives and tools. The data provides an initial overview of digitalisation in justice systems 

15 COM(2025)570 - Commission Communication on a dynamic EU Budget for the priorities of the future - The 
Multiannual Financial Framework 2028-2034, p. 3., and COM(2025)565 Proposal for a Regulation establishing 
the European Fund for economic, social and territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, fisheries and maritime, 
prosperity and security for the period 2028-2034, recital 20 and Article 3(1)(e)(ii). 
16 COM(2025) 570 final  – SWD(2025) 570 final/2 – Commission Staff Working Document accompanying the 
Communication on a dynamic EU Budget for the priorities of the future - The Multiannual Financial Framework 
2028-2034, p. 39. 
17 Draghi Report ‘The future of European competitiveness – In-depth analysis and recommendations’, p. 67. 
18  COM(2025)801  –  European  Judicial Training  Strategy  2025-2030  –  creating  a  supportive  environment  for 
DigitalJustice@2030. 
19 COM(2025) 30 final– A Competitiveness Compass for the EU, p.2. 
20 ‘Europe’s Choice’– Political Guidelines for the next European Commission 2024-2029, p. 6. 
21 Council of the EU (838/24) Budapest Declaration on the New European Competitiveness Deal, p.1.  
22 Council e-Justice Strategy 2024-2028 (C/2025/437). 
23 Council Conclusions from December 2024 on the use of Artificial Intelligence in the field of justice (16593/24), 
paragraph 25. 
24  These  two  high-level  fora  brought  together  Member  States,  the  European  Parliament,  representatives  of 
academia, practitioners, and civil society in four plenary meetings each between March 2025 and November 2025.  
25 The 2025 EU justice Scoreboard COM(2025) 375 final, section 2.2.3. Digitalisation. 

3 

 
 
 
in the EU. A more permanent mechanism, ‘a living repository’, will be developed on that basis 
for  the  collection  of  information  and  for  exchanging  best  practices.  The  repository  will  be 
hosted on the e-Justice Portal.26 Using the Portal’s structure and layout would allow Member 
States to easily make updates when needed, while the familiarity of the Portal is intended to 
minimise administrative burden. 

The aim is for Member States to identify good solutions in use that could lead to their wider 
implementation  and  foster  cross-border  interoperability.  The  Commission,  in  collaboration 
with the Council will organise exchanges of best practices among Member States. There are 
many  examples  of  good  digital  practices  in  the  EU  that  improve  the  quality  of  justice,  and 
provide  better  access,  and  more  transparency  for  those  subject  to,  and  working  within,  the 
justice systems. For example, in Estonia, all public services are available online. Their justice 
system  has  numerous  digital  tools  but  at  the  heart  of  the  system  is  the  e-File.  This  e-File 
provides  data  to  courts’  information  systems  and  is  interoperable  with  law  enforcement 
information  systems.  All  communication  between  parties  in  civil  cases  can  be  processed 
electronically, including creating and sending summons, minutes of hearings, and decisions - 
and all parties can electronically follow proceedings. Estonia has estimated that use of these 
digital tools has cut the average length of civil court proceedings from 156 days to 99 days.27  

The data collected will also form the basis for the proposed IT toolbox (see action 3) and help 
when setting investment and reform milestones and targets for possible funding measures under 
the proposed next MFF.28 

Action 1: The Commission will create a living repository of digital tools, in particular AI, used 
in justice across the EU, available on the European e-Justice Portal by the end of 2026.  

Action 2: The Commission will facilitate exchange of best practices among Member States on 
digital tools, in particular AI, used in justice.  

2.  IT toolbox for justice 

The work to map the digital tools currently available in the Member States has revealed that 
Member States have identical or similar needs and want to develop similar solutions. Several 
Member States have already deployed AI tools successfully and these solutions could benefit 
others. For example, advanced AI speech recognition tools are used to convert speech to text 
and transcribe hearings in several Member State, leading to clear time savings. Other Member 
States are using automated annotation and content description of judgments and other judicial 
decisions,  while some  Member States have started to  use large language models to  analyse 
judgments and draft legal documents. However, for the majority of Member States, the use of 
AI tools is only planned. The Council therefore invited the Commission to support Member 
States in collecting and sharing information on the use of AI tools in national justice systems 
in order to create and operate a shared ‘Justice AI toolbox’.29 

While full EU-wide harmonisation of digital justice solutions in national systems may stand in 
the way of healthy innovation, the current level of fragmentation and lack of standardisation is 
a weakness in terms of costs and efficiency. For example, it is not necessary or efficient for 
Member States to implement 27 different software systems to carry out legal research in courts. 

26 e-Justice: Estonian digital court-making. 
27 Factsheet e-Estonia: e-Justice.  
28 COM(2025) 565 final – Proposal for a Regulation establishing the European Fund for economic, social and 
territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, fisheries and maritime, prosperity and security for the period 2028-2034. 
29 Council Conclusions from December 2024 on the use of Artificial Intelligence in the field of justice (16593/24), 
paragraph 25. 

4 

 
 
 
The aim of the toolbox is to achieve cost savings and to lower barriers to implementation by 
providing  Member  States  with  a  set  of  IT  tools.  The  toolbox  is  a  natural  extension  of  the 
mapping,  the purpose being  not  only to  share IT solutions  but  also  aiming to help Member 
States  digitalise  their  justice  systems  in  practice.  By  using  tools  that  have  already  been 
developed  and  tested  by  other  countries,  Member  States  can  avoid  starting  from  scratch  in 
creating a new tool, which saves both time and money. Implementing successful tools in several 
Member States could help reuse common standards and aid interoperability.  

The  Commission  will  create  this  toolbox  to  help  Member  States  accelerate  their  level  of 
digitalisation and generate cost savings. The toolbox will include AI tools as well as any other 
relevant  IT  tools  for  use  in  justice  systems.  It  will  be  hosted  on  the  Interoperable  Europe 
Portal30 established by the  Interoperable Europe Act31 to  facilitate  the sharing of tools,  data 
standards and guidance. It will be up to every Member State to decide which tools they would 
like to share and to what extent.  

Action 3: The Commission will create the IT toolbox by the end of 2026 and promote its use.  

3.  AI in justice systems 

Effective use of AI in justice systems is part of the goal to place the EU at the forefront of the 
AI revolution, as set out in the AI Continent Action Plan.32 The Apply AI Strategy33 focuses on 
harnessing the transformative potential of AI, accelerating the uptake of AI across all sectors 
to improve competitiveness and economic growth as well as to reduce administrative burden. 
For the purposes of promoting and accelerating the use of AI in justice, the Apply AI Strategy 
relies on concrete actions in this DigitalJustice@2030 strategy.  

AI has enormous potential in the field of justice and could lead to significant efficiency gains. 
For  example,  in  Germany,  the  AI  assistant  OLGA  helps  judges  process  appeals  in  mass 
proceedings34 following the Dieselgate case.35 OLGA examines first-instance judgments and 
extracts parameters such as vehicle and engine type, exhaust standard and reasons for recall. 
Based on these  parameters, the tool automatically  groups  together  similar cases and  fills in 
individual  templates  designed  by  the  judges. The  use  of  OLGA  has  enabled  the  intelligent 
scheduling of cases with for example the same plaintiff representatives, allowing the court to 
hold very effective meeting days.36 This tool has also relieved judges of highly repetitive tasks 
allowing  them  to  concentrate  on  their  core  work  instead.  However,  most  importantly,  the 
system does not interfere with the decision-making as judges always take the decisions on each 
case after checking the facts. The Ministry of Justice and Migration of Baden-Württemberg 
reports37 that use of OLGA has made handling cases easier and significantly reduced the time 
to process them. In fact, without OLGA, it would take many years to process the cases with the 
current staffing. As the judge responsible for the OLGA project at the Higher Regional Court 

30 Interoperable Europe Portal. 
31 Regulation (EU) 2024/903 laying down measures for a high level of public sector interoperability across the 
Union (Interoperable Europe Act). 
32 COM(2025) 165 final– AI Continent Action Plan, p. 1. 
33 COM(2025)723 final – Apply AI Strategy, p. 1 and p. 12.  
34 ‘Mass proceedings’ are understood as multiple judicial actions brought by individual claimants concerning the 
same or similar practice. IT tools may be relevant also in other judicial actions addressing mass harm such as 
representative actions under the Representative Action Directive (EU) 2020/1828. 
35 ‘Dieselgate’ is the name of a scandal uncovered in 2015 concerning cars which had been sold with a specific 
software  in  the  diesel  engines  that  could  detect  when  the  car  was  being  tested,  changing  the  performance 
accordingly to improve results. It led to thousands of lawsuits and appeals. 
36 Spoenle, J. OLGA – der KI-Assistent für Dieselverfahren. 
37 Landtag von Baden-Württemberg, Drucksache 17/5658, p. 4. 

5 

 
 
 
of  Stuttgart  concluded:  ‘the  manual  processing  of  mass  proceedings  is  now  a  thing  of  the 
past’.38 

However, the use of AI in justice systems also comes with risks to fundamental rights and these 
risks need to be mitigated. AI tools should only support, and never replace, the judges in their 
decision-making.39 The AI Act40  categorises  certain  uses  of AI  as  high-risk. As  a  matter  of 
principle, AI systems intended to be used by a judicial authority to assist them in researching 
and  interpreting  facts  and  the  law  and  in  applying  the  law  to  a  concrete  set  of  facts  are 
considered  high-risk.  Consequently,  strict  requirements  apply.  AI  systems  intended  for 
administrative activities that do not affect the actual decision-making in individual cases, such 
as  pseudonymisation  of judicial  decisions,  documents  or  data,  are  not  considered  high-risk. 
They are nevertheless subject to transparency requirements.  

To  support  the  safe  implementation  of  AI  in  justice  systems,  the  Council  invited  the 
Commission to explore the potential of AI in the field of justice and assist Member States in 
implementing the AI Act.41 The Commission is committed to accompanying Member States in 
their AI  implementation  journey. The  first  step  was  to  adopt  the  guidance  on  prohibited AI 
practices in February 2025.42 The next step will be to finalise the general guidance on high-risk 
AI systems under the AI Act planned for publication in February 2026. The use of high-risk AI 
tools in justice systems is crucial and will help shape these guidelines. DigitalJustice@2030 
also  proposes  to  check  whether  Member  States  need  additional  support  to  use  AI  tools 
effectively in justice systems and whether a coordinated approach at EU level is warranted.  

Member  States  are  keen  to  use  AI  systems  in  justice  to  improve  efficiency  and  reduce 
backlogs.43  Several  measures  supporting  the  use  of  AI  in  justice  systems  are  outlined  in 
DigitalJustice@2030. The IT toolbox is designed to facilitate and accelerate the uptake of AI 
tools (action 3). EU funding is available for projects related to the use of AI in justice systems 
(action 11 and 12), and AI uptake will be monitored through the mapping of IT tools (action 
1). The  Commission  plans  to  further  support  national  authorities  by  discussing  and  helping 
them with their decisions about whether, and for what purpose, they should use AI tools, as 
well as how to do this in a way that increases efficiency as planned - possibly with dedicated 
guidelines.44  

At  EU  level,  Justice  and  Home  Affairs  agencies  and  bodies  consider  using  AI  in  their 
operational  work  and  may  be  testing  new  AI  tools.  The  Commission  will  monitor  these 
developments. 

Action 4: The Commission will elaborate on the use of high-risk AI systems in justice notably 
by defining relevant guidelines under the AI Act by February 2026, with input from the justice 
community. 

38 Landtag von Baden-Württemberg, Drucksache 17/5658, p. 4. 
39 Recital 61 of the AI Act. 
40 Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (AI Act). 
41 Council Conclusions from December 2024 on the use of Artificial Intelligence in the field of justice (16593/24), 
paragraph 21. 
42  C(2025)5052 final  -  Commission  Guidelines  on  prohibited  artificial  intelligence  practices  established  by 
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act). 
43 From the discussions in the expert meeting under the Polish presidency of the Council of the European Union 
in Warsaw ‘New Challenges of AI Development and e-Communication in the Field of Justice’ (19-20 May 2025).  
44  Conclusions  of  the European  Commission  and  the  Polish Presidency  in  the  official  Chronicle  of  the  expert 
meeting under the Polish presidency of the Council of the European Union in Warsaw  - New Challenges of AI 
Development and e-Communication in the Field of Justice (19-20 May 2025), p. 39.  

6 

 
 
 
Action 5: The Commission will identify together with the Member States, and other relevant 
stakeholders areas where the EU can support them in their uptake of AI in justice, possibly with 
dedicated guidelines about whether, for what purpose, and how they could use AI tools.  

4.  European Legal Data Space 

Individuals and professionals in many domains have a wealth of information at their fingertips. 
This is not the case for legal documents and data, which are often not available online, meaning 
that there is less accessibility and transparency in this domain. Currently, online legal data can 
be accessed in various ways, facilitated and supported by the EU. The European Legal Data 
Space aims to bring all this data together and in one place:  

•  EUR-Lex  for  access  to  the  authentic  EU  legislation  in  24  languages,  EU  case-law, 
national transposition measures as well as to some national case-law with search and 
analysis functions.  

•  N-Lex for access to Member States’ national law databases.  
• 

the e-Justice Portal for information on justice systems and on access to justice in the 
EU, as well as for access to EU and national case-law.  

•  several Member States operate their own platforms.  

There are many benefits to having easy access to up-to-date applicable legislation and case-
law not only at EU level, but also in all Member States. Imagine a Polish judge who needs to 
apply Italian law when deciding on a dispute between a Polish company and an Italian one. 
The  contract  between  the  two  companies  includes  a  choice-of-law  (governing  law)  clause 
specifying that Italian law applies.45 Since the Polish business has brought the case before a 
Polish court,46 the Polish judge will decide on the dispute based on Italian law and will need 
access to all related Italian legislation and case-law. If these are not available online, it is even 
more difficult for justice professionals in cross-border cases to find, understand, interpret and 
apply foreign law to a pending case.47 This can lead to significant delays, with a negative effect 
on  delivering  justice  and  undermining  economic  growth  and  competitiveness.  It  is  difficult 
enough for justice professionals to apply foreign laws on which they have not been trained, 
without also having to struggle to find the necessary documents. 

In  addition  to  helping  justice  professionals  in  cross-border  cases,  greater  transparency  also 
helps to increase public confidence and trust in the justice system. Access to information on 
the law, case-law and the judicial interpretation of legal provisions is important to exercise the 
right of access to justice.48  
That is why, on the basis of the 2020 European data strategy,49 a European Legal Data Space 
was put in place to harness the value of data to produce broader benefits for the EU economy 
and society. The aim is to provide easily accessible, reusable, and searchable data for legislation 
and case-law across the EU. The European Legal Data Space does not only provide data to help 
justice professionals in their work. It will also progressively provide access to judicial data, 
suitable for training AI systems, thus supporting legal tech companies in developing innovative 
AI tools adapted to the justice domain. Part of the key to well-functioning AI tools, is the quality 

45 In line with Article 3, Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I)  
46 The jurisdiction of the Polish court would be determined in accordance with Article 7(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 
1215/2012 (Brussels Ia Regulation). 
47 If the information cannot be found, the judge will be forced to make an official request for information under 
Article 4  of  the  European  Convention  on  Information  on  Foreign  Law  (1968,  CETS  062),  which  takes 
considerably more time than if the legislation and case-law were available online. 
48 CEPEJ Guidelines for the online publication of judicial decisions (CEPEJ (2024)9) 18 Nov 2024, p. 4. 
49 A European strategy for data (COM/2020/66), section 5.D. 

7 

 
 
 
of the training data. This is where the European Legal Data Space can help innovation, i.e. by 
opening up access to downloadable, high-quality, high-volume and relevant legal content. The 
carefully curated data for EU legal documents available in EUR-Lex is at the core of this work.  

Common standards are crucial to making the European Legal Data Space work, and ensuring 
the interoperability of legal and judicial data, in particular the European Legislation Identifier 
(ELI)50  and  the  European  Case  Law  Identifier  (ECLI).51 Access  to  legislation  and  case-law 
requires having all relevant documents correctly identified, machine-readable and searchable 
online. Ensuring that ELI and ECLI are adopted as quickly as possible by all Member States is 
therefore key.52 The ELI standard is now used by 19 Member States, with seven having adopted 
ELI since 2024. ECLI has been partially implemented in 21 Member States, in most cases by 
a limited number of courts only. 17 of the Member States that have adopted the ECLI standard 
are connected to the ECLI search engine on the European e-Justice Portal.  

While  the  work  on  N-Lex  and  the  e-Justice  Portal  and  on  the  associated  law  and  case-law 
search engines continues, the actions in DigitalJustice@2030 should ultimately result in having 
easily accessible, reusable, and searchable judicial data for all justice professionals, individuals 
and legal tech companies. The Commission is committed to full implementation of ELI and 
ECLI, supporting Member States in various ways. EU funding under the Technical Support 
Instrument  and  further  technical  assistance  under  the  future  MFF  could  be  used  for 
implementing ELI and ECLI. 
In the Data Union Strategy,53 the Commission announced that it will propose to expand the list 
of  high-value  datasets  in  202654  to  cover  also  legal  data,  with  improved  quality  and 
accessibility. High-value datasets must be made freely available in machine-readable formats 
and via a standardised application programming interface. Where relevant, high-value datasets 
should be available as bulk download. Extending the list of high‑value datasets will make more 
data available to SMEs, startups and AI developers by lowering data‑access barriers.  

Action 6: The Commission and the Publications Office of the EU will support complete uptake 
of ELI and ECLI. For ECLI, ensure that, by 2030, all case-law in all Member States is assigned 
an ECLI and can easily be found on the ECLI search engine on the European e-Justice Portal. 
The first step will be to assign an ECLI to all new court decisions in all courts. The second will 
be to integrate all existing case-law. For ELI, ensure that, by 2030, each piece of legislation in 
all Member States is assigned an ELI, to be easily found on the ELI search engine.  

Action 7: The Commission and the Publications Office of the EU will support the development 
of legal technology applications, including AI tools for justice by improving the availability 
and re-usability of legal and judicial data (including case law and legislation).  

5.  Videoconferencing 

The COVID-19 pandemic forced large parts of the workforce (including the judiciary) to adapt 
to the new situation: the use of videoconferencing became a viable solution in many cases to 
ensure continuity of justice. Even though by 2020, videoconferencing was already regulated 

50 What is ELI? 
51 What is ECLI?  
52 The 2020 Commission Communication (COM/2020/710 final) – “Digitalisation of justice in the EU. A toolbox 
of opportunities” underlined already the importance of the availability of judicial data (Section 3.4.). 
53 COM(2025)835 – Commission Communication on the Data Union Strategy - Unlocking data for AI, p. 10. 
54 Article 13 and 14 under the Open Data Directive (Directive (EU) 2019/1024 on open data and the re-use of 
public sector information (recast)). 

8 

 
 
 
and used in some cases of EU cross-border cooperation in civil and criminal matters55, the legal 
basis  was  lacking  for  many  other  cross-border  procedures.  The  Digitalisation  Regulation 
partially  closed  this  gap  and  now  provides  a  legal  basis  for  conducting  hearings  through 
videoconferencing for cross-border judicial proceedings in civil and commercial  matters, as 
well as for judicial cooperation procedures in criminal matters.  

Under EU law, witnesses, experts, suspects and accused persons, as well as victims of crime 
can  be  heard  through  videoconferencing  to  gather  evidence  if  present  in  another  Member 
State.56  For  victims  of  crime,  the  Commission  also  proposes  to  include  a  provision  in  the 
Victims’  Rights  Directive  on  the  use  of  videoconferencing  in  order  to  facilitate  remote 
participation in criminal proceedings of victims who are resident abroad. This proposal is still 
under negotiation. There are currently no EU-wide rules governing the remote participation of 
a suspect or accused person in court hearings in criminal proceedings from another Member 
State for purposes other than gathering of evidence. This situation often leads to significant 
travel costs for a suspect or accused person, and can pose practical challenges, in particular for 
vulnerable individuals. It may also result in trials being conducted in absentia or require the 
use of very intrusive coercive measures such as a European Arrest Warrant to ensure the suspect 
or accused person attends the trial.  

These considerations were acknowledged in the latest evaluation on the implementation of the 
European Investigation Order,57 which invites the Commission to find a solution at EU level to 
permit the participation of accused persons in trials via videoconference from another Member 
State. The Commission  seeks  to  address  this  gap to  enable  remote participation in  criminal 
court hearings of a suspect or accused person from another Member State by videoconference. 
When  it  comes  to  victims  of  crime,  the  Commission  will  assess  how  remote  participation 
should also be addressed, taking into account the outcome of the negotiations on the revision 
of the Victims’ Rights Directive. 

There  are  certain  practical  challenges  to  be  tackled  to  ensure  that  remote  hearings  via 
videoconference  go  smoothly.  For 
instance,  Member  States  often  use  different 
videoconferencing platforms, which is not an issue in itself but may become an obstacle when 
conducting a remote cross-border hearing, as different software and hardware solutions are not 
always  interoperable.  This  is  important  when  a  videoconference  is  organised  between  two 
judicial authorities in different Member States, for example, for the taking of evidence in civil 
matters58 and during hearings in criminal matters.  

While there are already solutions available to this problem of interoperability, such as add-ons, 
plug-ins and third-party applications, these solutions often make the connection unstable and 
is  currently  no  pan-EU 
raise  concerns  about  data  protection  and  privacy.  There 
videoconferencing solution for cross-border proceedings in justice matters. Each Member State 
either  uses  off-the-shelf  products  or  tools  they  have  developed  themselves.  This  may  be 
appropriate  enough  for  domestic  hearings  but,  for  cross-border  hearings,  a  lack  of 

55 In particular, Directive 2014/41/EU regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters, Article 10 
of the Convention on mutual assistance in criminal matters between the EU Member States (42000A0712(01)), 
Directive  2012/29/EU  on  the  rights  of  victims  of  crime,  and  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No 1206/2001  on 
cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters. 
56  In  accordance  with  Directive  2014/41/EU  of  3 April  2014  regarding  the  European  Investigation  Order  in 
criminal matters, the EU Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (42000A0712(01)) and Directive 
2012/29/EU on the rights of victims of crime. 
57 Final report on the tenth round of mutual evaluations on the implementation of the European Investigation Order 
(EIO), 15834/1/24, Brussels, 10 December 2024. 
58 Under Regulation (EU) 2020/1783 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of 
evidence in civil or commercial matters (taking of evidence) (recast). 

9 

 
 
 
interoperability  makes  conducting  remote  hearings  difficult  if  not  impossible.  Therefore,  it 
would be necessary to look for a solution to address interoperability challenges. That is why 
the Commission will analyse different options for overcoming barriers to interoperability.59 

In  addition,  the  Commission  will  support  Member  States  by  providing  a  set  of  voluntary 
common  technical  requirements  for  videoconferencing.  These  requirements  will  cover,  for 
instance,  how  to  conduct  videoconference,  and  further  develop  videoconferencing  software 
already in use. These requirements would be adapted for use in the justice domain and would 
provide a solid basis, for ensuring good audio and visual quality in real-time for secure and 
confidential  videoconference  during  judicial  proceedings.  Member  States  could  use  these 
requirements when running procurement or further development procedures, for example, and 
save  on  the  cost  of  putting  together  such  requirements  for  themselves.  These  voluntary 
technical requirements are intended to facilitate interoperability. They will be accessible via 
the Interoperable Europe Portal.  

Action  8:  The  Commission  will  recommend  voluntary,  common  EU-wide  technical 
requirements for videoconferencing by the end of 2027. 

Action 9: In the context of the European Investigation Order Directive review, the Commission 
will  seek  to  enable  remote  participation  in  criminal  court  hearings  of  suspects  or  accused 
persons from another Member State via videoconference, including the necessary procedural 
safeguards.  The  Commission  will  also  assess  the  corresponding  need  to  include  rules  to 
facilitate the remote participation of victims of crime as well as necessary safeguards, taking 
into account the outcome of the negotiations on the revision of the Victims’ Rights Directive. 

Action  10:  The  Commission  will  study  the  feasibility  and  assess  the  costs  and  benefits  of 
different  options  to  overcome  interoperability  issues  for  cross-border  videoconferencing  in 
judicial proceedings by the end of 2027. 

6.  Funding 

Digitalising national justice systems is an investment that aims to achieve more efficient justice. 
This investment will be gradually offset and ultimately save resources. For instance, rolling out 
videoconferencing  in  court  rooms  in  Czechia  has  been  a  success.  In  2024,  there  were  on 
average  12  300  hearings  conducted  via  videoconferencing.  The  roll-out  of  equipment  and 
related software in courtrooms has cost approximately EUR 8 million, with support through 
EU funding under the Recovery and Resilience Facility.60 Videoconferencing now saves the 
Czech judicial authorities more than EUR 2.2 million annually in transport and security escort 
costs, witness compensation and travel reimbursements for witnesses – and these savings will 
continue.61 

Investment  in  digitalisation  will  also  contribute  to  increased  productivity.  Ultimately,  such 
investment  aims  to  increase  the  efficiency  of  national  justice  systems,  which  will  have  a 
positive  impact  on  economic  growth.  Some  parts  of  this  DigitalJustice@2030  strategy,  e.g. 
encouraging the re-use of IT tools, will generate savings for national budgets, while improving 
interoperability between national justice systems. 

59 IT development and procurement strategy choices will be subject to pre-approval by the European Commission 
Information Technology and Cybersecurity Board. 
60 Regulation (EU) 2021/241 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility. 
61 Contribution of Mr Přemysl Sezemský, Director of the e-Justice Department at the Ministry of Justice of the 
Czech  Republic  Official  Chronicle  of  the  expert  meeting  under  the  Polish  presidency  of  the  Council  of  the 
European Union in Warsaw - New Challenges of AI Development and e-Communication in the Field of Justice 
(19-20 May 2025), p. 15-16.  

10 

 
 
 
In the light of these considerations, the Council invited the Commission to promote adequate 
funding for the development and use of AI in justice.62 The Council’s e-Justice Strategy for 
2024-202863 stresses that Member States should be able to seek funding through the various 
financial instruments included in the MFF. Therefore, access to financing should be facilitated 
at EU level. 

The EU already supports Member States in their efforts to make their judicial systems more 
efficient through several funding instruments, which pursue different objectives:  

•  The  Justice  Programme  supports  the  development  of  cross-border  digitalisation 
projects but has a limited budget. It currently has a special focus on helping Member 
States implement the Digitalisation Regulation.64 

•  The Recovery and Resilience Facility supports reforms and investments undertaken by 
Member States to make their economies and societies more sustainable, resilient and 
better prepared for the challenges and opportunities of the green and digital transitions. 
Several measures contained in the Recovery and Resilience Plans aim to advance the 
digitalisation of Member States’ justice systems. Around half of the Member States65 
included such reforms and investments in their recovery and resilience plans. Projects 
include  for  instance  videoconferencing,  introducing  digital  audio-recordings  of 
proceedings,  improvement  in  case  management,  digitalising  civil  and  criminal 
proceedings.  

•  The Digital Europe Programme supports the Commission’s work on the digitalisation 
of EU cross-border judicial cooperation, particularly in the context of the Digitalisation 
Regulation.  It  also  supports  uptake  of  ELI  in  the  Member  States.  It  is  used  to  offer 
expert consultancy and workshops as well as to support the adherence of Member States 
to the ELI based search on N-Lex. 

•  The Technical Support Instrument supports Member States by providing tailor-made 
technical  expertise.  It  can  be  used  to  support  projects  related  to  the  digitalisation  of 
national  justice  systems,  such  as  publication  of  case-law,  further  uptake  of  ECLI, 
automated  processing  using  AI,  and  videoconferencing.  However,  one  important 
limitation is that it cannot be used to fund actual IT development work, nor the purchase 
of software and hardware.66 Projects  under the Technical  Support  Instrument should 
provide  clear  EU  added  value,  allowing  for  the  re-use  of  results  achieved  in  other 
Member States.  

Under the next MFF, 67 the aim is to make the EU budget simpler and more flexible. This would 
allow funding to be adjusted to changing priorities and new technological developments. The 
Commission  has  proposed  an  ambitious,  policy-based  budget  for  the  period  2028  to  2034. 

62 Council Conclusions from December 2024 on the use of Artificial Intelligence in the field of justice (16593/24), 
para 22.  
63 Council e-Justice Strategy 2024-2028 (C/2025/437) para 24.  
64  The  2023-2025  Work  Programme  of  the  Justice  programme,  p.  23,  as  well  as  the  future  2026-2027  Work 
Programme of the Justice programme. 
65 BE, BG, CY, CZ, EL, ES, HR, HU, IT, MT, NL, PT, RO, SI, SK.  
66 As  highlighted  in  the  Conclusions  of  the  European  Commission  and  the  Polish  Presidency  in  the  official 
Chronicle of the expert meeting under the Polish presidency of the Council of the European Union in Warsaw - 
New Challenges of AI Development and e-Communication in the Field of Justice (19-20 May 2025), p. 39.  
67 COM(2025) 570 final – Commission Communication on a dynamic EU Budget for the priorities of the future 
– The Multiannual Financial Framework 2028-2034, p. 2. 

11 

 
 
 
 
Faced with insufficient and uneven progress on the EU’s digital transformation,68 the budget 
would provide support for the digitalisation of justice systems at national and EU level based 
on two pillars: 

i. 

 Digitalised justice systems are more efficient and resilient, so Member States could use 
their National and Regional Partnership Plans69 to fund digitalisation of national justice 
systems. Funds could also be used to achieve the targets set in the Digital Decade policy 
programme,  which  aims  to  make  all  key  public  services  available  online  by  2030.70 
Compared with current financing instruments, the National and Regional Partnership 
Plans  would  reduce  the  administrative  burden  on  national  and  regional  judicial 
authorities.71 National targets to digitalise national justice systems could be based on 
the data collection in action 1.  

ii.  The proposal for a new Justice programme aims to contribute to the development of an 
efficient,  inclusive  and  resilient  European  area  of  justice,  and  would  support  the 
digitalisation  of  justice  at  EU  level.72  Its  increased  focus  on  digitalisation  under  its 
general  and  specific  objectives73  aims  to  ensure  a  more  strategic  and  consistent 
approach to all the issues and challenges related to digitalisation of justice systems. It 
has a proposed significant increase in budget. The proposed programme will continue 
to support the maintenance of existing IT tools or platforms and the setting up of new 
ones needed for judicial cooperation instruments,74 including helping Member States 
roll out implementing acts under the Digitalisation Regulation.  

Action  11:  The  Commission  proposes  to  continue  funding  projects  and  actions  at  EU  and 
Member State level under the next MFF through the proposed Justice Programme. 

Action 12: The Commission aims to support the digitalisation of national justice systems under 
the next MFF through the proposed National and Regional Partnership Plans.  

7.  Further digitalisation of cross-border proceedings in civil and commercial matters 
Even after the full implementation of the Digitalisation Regulation, it will still not be possible 
to carry out cross-border judicial procedures entirely by digital means, e.g. a court case from 
start  to  finish.  The  Digitalisation  Regulation  does  not  provide  for  the  digitalisation  of 
communications for all procedural steps in all cross-border judicial procedures, or for initiating 
all types of court proceedings. For example, where the international jurisdiction of the court 

68 COM(2025) 565 final – Proposal for a Regulation establishing the European Fund for economic, social and 
territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, fisheries and maritime, prosperity and security for the period 2028-2034, 
recital 7. 
69 COM(2025) 565 final – Proposal for a Regulation establishing the European Fund for economic, social and 
territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, fisheries and maritime, prosperity and security for the period 2028-2034, 
recital 20, and Article 3.1(e)(ii) and (iii). 
70 COM(2025) 565 final – Proposal for a Regulation establishing the European Fund for economic, social and 
territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, fisheries and maritime, prosperity and security for the period 2028-2034, 
Article 3.1(a)(iv). 
71 COM(2025) 570 final – Commission Communication on a dynamic EU Budget for the priorities of the future 
– The Multiannual Financial Framework 2028-2034, p. 24. 
72 COM(2025) 570 final – Commission Communication on a dynamic EU Budget for the priorities of the future 
– The Multiannual Financial Framework 2028-2034, p. 18. 
73 COM(2025)463 final – Proposal for a Regulation establishing the Justice programme for the period 2028-2034, 
Explanatory memorandum, p. 10, Recitals 2 and 18, Article 3. 
74 COM(2025)463 final – Proposal for a Regulation establishing the Justice programme for the period 2028-2034, 
Explanatory memorandum, Recital 10. 

12 

 
 
 
 
has been established,75 the parties to the proceedings may communicate electronically with that 
court in certain cases,76 but they will not be able to request a remote hearing or present written 
evidence  through  the  European  Electronic Access  Point.  It  will  also  not  be  possible  for  a 
business to digitally recover a contested debt from another business in court if the value of the 
claim exceeds EUR 5 000, as the European Electronic Access Point cannot not be used for that 
purpose and existing national IT systems may not give access to non-residents.  

Making digital tools available to individuals and companies to submit claims or to monitor and 
proceed with judicial proceedings until the judgment has been delivered would make justice 
more  efficient.  It  would  also  save  time  and  money  for  businesses  and  individuals  in  cross-
border civil and commercial law judicial proceedings.  

The tool for the full digitalisation of cross-border judicial procedures could be an extension of 
the European Electronic Access  Point to  all civil and commercial matters with  cross-border 
implications. The European Electronic Access Point will be operational as of 2028 and could 
be  turned  into  a  single  access  point  where  individuals  and  businesses  could  launch,  and 
participate  in,  cross-border  civil  procedures.  The  work  to  prepare  the  comprehensive 
Commission evaluation of the Digitalisation Regulation77 will be an opportunity to assess the 
functioning  of  the  European  Electronic  Access  Point  and  the  progress  made  with  the 
digitalisation of justice systems within Member States as well as to identify possible gaps and 
weaknesses.  

Over the next years, in preparation for the evaluation, the Commission intends to carry out a 
study analysing the effects of the further digitalisation of cross-border proceedings in civil and 
commercial  matters.  This  analysis  could  feed  into  the  evaluation  as  well  as  into  a  joint 
reflection on the future of civil and commercial judicial proceedings  together with Member 
States, the European Parliament and justice community stakeholders.  
The Digital Identity Wallet created under the European Digital Identity Framework78 should 
facilitate online access to judicial proceedings. They will provide every EU citizen or resident 
with an electronic identity, enabling them to securely identify themselves and to sign electronic 
documents  using  a  qualified  electronic  signature.  In  addition,  the  European  Digital  Identity 
Wallets should be used for exchanging electronic documents. Building on the European Digital 
Identity  Framework,  these  European  Business  Wallets  will  create  a  digital  identity  for 
economic operators and public authorities allowing their identification and authentication, the 
receipt and storage of official notifications, and the sharing of verified credentials. 

Action 13: The Commission will analyse the effects of the possible further digitalisation of 
cross-border  proceedings  in  civil  and  commercial  matters,  beyond  the  scope  of  the 
Digitalisation Regulation by the end of 2028. 

Action 14: The Commission will develop the European Electronic Access Point so that it could 
be expanded later to all civil and commercial law cases with cross-border implications.  

8.  Conclusion 

The actions in DigitalJustice@2030 aim at creating the conditions for stepping up digital justice 
in the EU by 2030. It is also important to think beyond 2030 because the next MFF aims to set 

75  In  accordance  with  Regulation  (EU)  No 1215/2012  on  jurisdiction  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of 
judgments in civil and commercial matters (recast). 
76  For  example,  in  proceedings  for  recognition,  a  declaration  of  enforceability  or  refusal  of  recognition  or  to 
electronically request certificates according to Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012. 
77 To be published by 2033. 
78 Regulation (EU) 2024/1183 as regards establishing the European Digital Identity Framework. 

13 

 
 
 
the trajectory for the funding opportunities needed to digitalise national justice systems. In the 
mid- to long-term, the actions and funds should support Member States by providing them with 
the tools and infrastructure to digitalise their national justice systems, enabling them to reap 
the benefits of more efficient justice systems, including the benefit of driving economic growth. 

These actions will be carried out in continuous dialogue and vital cooperation with the Member 
States, and, where necessary, with other stakeholders in relevant forums. This cooperation will 
be key. DigitalJustice@2030 focuses almost exclusively on non-legislative actions, which can 
only  be  successful  if  there  is  sustained  cooperation  between  the  Member  States  and  the 
Commission.  The  success  of  this  strategy  relies  on  voluntary,  active  and  continuous 
participation by Member States.  

With wide-scale digitalisation, it will no longer matter where users live as all Member States 
will have a digital justice system and access to justice via digital tools will be universal. Every 
Member State should aim to have a single entry point that links all courts. This should allow 
for anybody to get in touch with the courts, participate in hearings and launch and advance 
judicial procedures from anywhere, at any time, thus reducing costs of justice. 

As a result of DigitalJustice@2030, Member States will be able to learn and benefit from the 
experience  gained  by  other  countries  developing  and  using  digital  tools  and  infrastructure. 
Instead of every Member State individually developing IT tools for use in its justice system, it 
will be able to  select  tools  that  have already proven valuable, in  carrying out tasks that are 
common to all justice systems.  

The use of AI tools in justice systems should be promoted to achieve efficiency gains, helping 
reduce backlog of cases in courts and ease the strained budgets of national justice systems.  

By 2030, there should be easy online access for all justice professionals to all legislation and 
case-law. Legal tech companies should also have easy access to enough judicial data, which is 
crucial for developing and training AI tools adapted for use in justice systems.  

Monitoring the success of the DigitalJustice@2030 will be done mainly through the annual EU 
Justice Scoreboard, which has a dedicated chapter on digitalisation of national justice systems.  

14