Redesigning Criminal Proceedings in Light of Digital Justice: The Role of Electronic Proceedings in Reducing Delays and the Requirements of the Judiciary’s Transformation and Excellence Document

Abstract

Protracted criminal proceedings are not merely the result of case backlogs or personnel shortages; rather, they stem from fragmented information flows, redundant administrative tasks, the intake of incomplete case files, poor time management, a lack of coordination among institutions within the criminal justice chain, and the absence of clear accountability mechanisms. Employing a descriptive-analytical approach and drawing upon the Code of Criminal Procedure, regulations governing the use of computer and telecommunication systems, the Judiciary’s 2024 Transformation and Excellence Document, directives on the digitization and smartization of judicial processes, and established literature on digital justice, this study examines the conditions under which electronic proceedings can evolve from a mere set of online administrative services into a tool for redesigning criminal procedures and mitigating unjustified delays. Analytical findings indicate that the impact of technology on case processing time is neither automatic nor linear. Electronic registration and case assignment, online service of process, integrated electronic case files, video conferencing, structured data exchange, and time-management dashboards lead to a sustained reduction in delays only when accompanied by input screening, stage-specific time standards, system interoperability, action traceability, universal access, data security, and human oversight. Conversely, migrating flawed paper-based processes to a digital environment can replicate—and even amplify—existing inefficiencies in terms of speed and scale; furthermore, the digital divide, weak identity verification, security risks, and disruptions to confidential lawyer-client communication can undermine fair trial guarantees. By distinguishing between "administrative speed" and "adjudication within a reasonable timeframe," the article proposes a four-layered model comprising smart intake and universal access, case-flow management, secure multi-channel judicial communication, and data-driven, accountable governance. The conclusion is that the legal and policy capacity required to transition to process-oriented digital justice within the Iranian system exists to a significant extent; however, its realization necessitates the operationalization of time-based benchmarks, the establishment of rules for technological error remediation, the assessment of fundamental rights impacts, the guarantee of alternative access pathways, and independent audits of system quality and security.