Managing Records As Reliable Evidence For ICT/ EGovernment And

managing records as reliable evidence for ict/ e-government and freedom of information uganda court case study internationa

Managing Records as Reliable Evidence for ICT/ e-Government and
Freedom of Information
Uganda Court Case Study

International Records Management Trust
August 2011
Contents
Page
Introduction
2
The Structure of the Judicial Sector
2
ICT in the Judiciary
5
Records Management in the Commercial Court
6
Records Management Integration with Case Management Systems
6
Analysis of Records Management Integration in CCAS
15
Conclusion
16
Introduction
The purpose of the court case studies is to examine the manner in
which the courts are handling records management in the electronic
environment. In particular, the studies assess case management
systems, where they are in use, to determine the extent to which
international good practice in records management is being considered.
This case study was undertaken at the Commercial Court, which is a
division of the High Court.
The Structure of the Judicial Sector
The Ministry of Justice is the part of the executive that is entrusted
with the administrative functions of government in accordance with the
Constitution and laws of the state. The Ministry makes and publishes
rules, regulations and statutory instruments to help implement the
laws made by Parliament and interpreted by the courts. The Ministry is
also entrusted with rendering legal representation and advice to the
rest of the organs of the government.
The Judiciary is a separate arm of government that interprets the law
and applies it to particular cases. The institutions that are
entrusted with these functions are the courts of law. According to
Article 126 (1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda,
judicial power is to be exercised by the courts established under the
Constitution in the name of the people and in conformity with law. The
Chief Justice is the Head of the Judiciary. He is responsible for the
administration and supervision of all Courts in Uganda and may issue
orders and directions to the courts necessary for the proper and
efficient administration of justice. The Uganda Judiciary has
undergone tremendous changes since Independence. Following the
enactment of the 1995 Constitution, the Judiciary structure has been
redefined to consist of the following courts:
*
Supreme Court
*
Court of Appeal/Constitutional Court
*
High Court
*
Chief Magistrates’ Courts
*
Grade I Magistrates’ Courts
*
Grade II Magistrates’ Courts
*
The Local Council Courts
*
Family and Children Courts and Land.
The Supreme Court of Uganda
Until October 1977, the Court of Appeal of East Africa was the final
appellate court in Uganda’s judicial system. However, on the
disintegration of the East African Community, the East Africa Court of
Appeal was dissolved. This gave rise to individual Courts of Appeal in
each country. In Uganda, the Court of Appeal was renamed the Supreme
Court by the 1995 Constitution and the 1996 Judicature Statute. The
Supreme Court is the highest court of the land. It entertains appeals
from the Court of Appeal of Uganda and from the Constitutional Court,
and it has unlimited civil, criminal and territorial jurisdiction,
despite the fact that it does not have original jurisdiction, except
in the case of Presidential Election Petitions. The Supreme Court has
powers to uphold or reverse decisions from the lower courts and to
substitute judgments or to order retrials. The procedures, powers and
jurisdictions of the Supreme Court are regulated by the Supreme Court
Rules, 1996. The Court is comprised of the Chief Justice and other
Justices of the Supreme Court, of whom there must be five while
hearing an appeal. The President of Uganda, in consultation with the
Judicial Service Commission, appoints the Chief Justice and other
judges.
The Court of Appeal of Uganda
The Court of Appeal is established under Article 134 of the 1995
Constitution and Section 9 of the Judicature Act Cap. 13. It is the
second highest court in the land. It is duly constituted when it
consists of an odd number not less than three justices of the Court of
Appeal. It is this Court that constitutes itself into a Constitutional
Court, in accordance with the Constitution, to hear constitutional
cases.
The Constitutional Court of Uganda is established under Article 137 of
the 1995 Constitution. The Constitutional Court consists of five
justices and handles all matters, issues or cases concerning the
interpretation of the Constitution. It sits as a reconstituted court
of Appeal.
The Court of Appeal has appellate jurisdiction. It handles appeals
from the High Court of Uganda. It only has original jurisdiction when
sitting as a Constitutional Court. Otherwise, it has unlimited civil,
criminal, territorial and constitutional jurisdiction. The Court of
Appeal Rules, 1996, governs its procedures and powers.
The High Court of Uganda
The High Court is the third highest in the judicial hierarchy. It has
unlimited original, civil, criminal and territorial jurisdiction. It
can try any case from Uganda of any value, subject, or crime and can
impose any penalty conferred by law. It has power to do anything or
issue any order to further justice by virtue of S. 101 of the Civil
Procedure Act. The Principal Judge is the head of High Court, and in
that capacity, assists the Chief Justice in the administration of High
Court and subordinate courts. The High Court also sits as the
Commercial Court, in the High Court Commercial Division. The
establishment of the High Court Commercial Division was meant to bring
about expeditious settlement of commercial disputes in support of
enterprise efficiency.
The Chief Magistrate’s Court
The Chief Magistrates’ Court may try all offences except those where
the maximum penalty is death. It has limited original criminal
jurisdiction. In civil cases, it also has limited original
jurisdiction and can only try civil cases with a value of less than 50
million shillings. It has appellate jurisdiction from grade II courts.
This court has supervisory powers over all magistrates’ courts of the
lower levels.
Other Courts
Besides the courts of judicature there are other courts established
with specific jurisdictions. The Family and Children Courts fall into
this category. In addition, there are in several bodies that exercise
judicial functions, such as Land Tribunals. The Constitution provides
for the establishment of Qadhi’s Courts for marriage, divorce,
inheritance of property and guardianship, where both parties consent
to their jurisdiction. However, Parliament has not yet passed a law to
operationalise these courts.
ICT in the Judiciary
The Judiciary has an ICT Policy and Strategic Plan. The main objective
of this strategy is to guide the utilisation of ICT in judicial
service delivery. The Commercial Court Division is guided by the
policy and strategic plan and in addition a more comprehensive ICT
policy has been developed for the Commercial Court. The main
priorities of this policy include:
*
implementing the digital court recording and transcription system
at all commercial courts and at the new Commercial Court
headquarters
*
launching the new Judiciary website
*
automate workflow and capture, store and retrieve digital records
by extending the Database Management System (DBMS) to all courts.
The DBMS catalogues the locations of stored document images and adds
that information to the index information created by its indexing
software. The implementation of this system requires scanning paper
records to digital format. The system provides on-line access and
retrieval for electronic documents and reports to staff via the
existing LAN. System users are able to perform searches, and retrieve
and view electronic records and digital surrogates of hardcopy records
from their PCs. There are offline storage media in a different
building, which serves as backup.
Records Management in the Commercial Court
Records management in the Commercial Court is the responsibility of
the registry supervisor, who reports directly to the Registrar. The
Commercial Court has two registries; one for land matters and another
for civil matters. The registry supervisor is in charge of the
registry on a day-to-day basis and oversees the updating and movement
of files in the registry to ensure that there are no administrative
delays in the court. In particular, the supervisor supervises the
registration of new cases, receives documents over the registry
counter and passes them to the clerks handling the cases. He also
studies case documents and calculates the fees that should be paid
based on a fee schedule set by the High Court. He then advises the
person submitting the documents of the fee amount to be paid and once
the fee has been paid, the supervisor gives the file a case number.
Once the case starts, the supervisor continues to receive and stamp
documents and pass them over to the clerk handling the case to which
they relate. There is inadequate space in the registries, which leads
to poor storage of case files and can result in misplacement of court
documents and files.
Records Management Integration with Case Management Systems
The Judiciary has implemented a court case management system called
CCAS in the Court of Appeal, some High Court Circuits and divisions
and magisterial areas. It is an integrated system designed to automate
the case management workflow. It has also been implemented in 50% of
the High Court Circuits, namely: Jinja, Masaka, Lira, Arua, Gulu,
Soroti and all the High Court Divisions in Kampala (Civil, Criminal,
Family, Commercial, Land, Anti-corruption and War Crimes). Others
implementing CCAS include Chief Magistrates Courts and the Planning
Registry, which are linked to the Kampala Data Centre via the
Internet. However, other courts use stand-alone computers to record
transactions in CCAS, but send copies of data manually to the Kampala
Data Centre.
Assessment of CCAS
Project Initiation
Good Practice Statement
Indicator
Findings
Records management issues are identified and documented when the need
for an ICT or e-Government system is identified and documented.
*
Records management issues have been identified and documented
*
All ICT and e-Government projects include a clear statement on
addressing records management requirements.
No
A governance structure (such as a project steering committee) is in
place to ensure the collaboration of key individuals in planning,
designing and developing the system, including the application system
manager, project manager, systems developers and records managers.
Record managers are represented within the governance structure for
the ICT or e-Government system and are part of the planning, design
and development of the system.
No
Planning
Good Practice Statement
Indicator
Findings
The analysis of business needs includes records management issues;
potential solutions incorporate records management considerations.
*
A business needs analysis has been carried out
*
The analysis includes a consideration of records management
issues.
No
In assessing risks associated with the potential solutions, risks
associated with records management are also taken into account.
Risks associated with records management in the potential solutions
have been assessed and documented.
No
Requirements Analysis
Good Practice Statement
Indicator
Findings
An analysis has been conducted of the records management requirements
for the ICT or e-Government system based on the records management
issues identified during the planning stages.
An analysis of the records management requirements of the ICT or
e-Government system has been conducted and documented.
No
The analysis of records management requirements for the ICT or
e-Government system makes reference to internationally recognised
standards.
The analysis makes reference to international records management
standards or other internationally recognised sets of requirements
(eg, ISO 15489, MoReq, DoD 5015, DIRKS, etc).
No
Design
Good Practice Statement
Indicator
Findings
The points in the process where records are expected to be generated
and captured are defined and reflected in the functional requirements
of the ICT or e-Government system.
*
All transactions that result in the creation of records within the
ICT or e-Government system have been defined and documented
*
A mechanism is in place to ensure that all records created within
the ICT or e-Government system are effectively managed as evidence
of transactions.
No
Performance measures are developed for assessing the records
management performance of the ICT or e-Government system.
Performance measures are in place to assess the ability of the system
to meet records management requirements.
No
The system creates an audit trail that keeps a complete history of the
creation, use and retention of all records within the system.
The system captures metadata and creates an audit trail to provide a
complete record of the creation, use and retention of records within
the system.
Yes in CCAS but nothing on retention of records.
Performance measures are carried out regularly to assess the ability
of the system to meet records management requirements.
The system’s records management performance has been assessed within
the last 12 months.
No
A designated member of staff has been assigned responsibility for
monitoring the system audit trail.
Responsibility for monitoring the system audit trail is documented and
assigned to a designated member of staff.
Yes
The audit trail is analysed regularly to monitor access to the system,
changes to access and security controls, and the integrity of records
within the system.
The system audit trail has been analysed within the last 12 months.
Yes
Implementation
Good Practice Statement
Indicator
Findings
The developed system has been tested for its records management
performance against technical, management and functional records
management requirements. Testing included a ‘live’ test in an
operational context. An acceptance test has been conducted to confirm
that the system meets records management requirements.
Acceptance tests have been carried out for records management
requirements; acceptance tests for records management requirements may
be separate or incorporated in acceptance tests for the whole system.
No
Maintenance
Good Practice Statement
Indicator
Findings
Mechanisms have been established to assess system compliance with
records management requirements through time.
There is a documented mechanism for assessing the system for
compliance with records management requirements; compliance assessment
for records management requirements may be separate or incorporated in
compliance assessment for the whole system.
No
Assessments for system compliance with records management requirements
are regularly carried out.
An assessment for records management compliance has been carried out
in the last 12 months.
No
Review and Evaluation
Good Practice Statement
Indicator
Findings
There are performance standards to assess whether the ICT or
e-Government system meets records management requirements, for example
in relation to records security, data quality and data completeness.
These may be separate records management standards or systems
standards that include records management standards. The standards
should be related to records management requirements.
There are documented performance standards to measure whether the ICT
or e-Government system meets records management requirements.
No
Performance assessments are conducted to assess the system’s
compliance with records management standards.
A performance assessment has been carried out to assess the system’s
compliance with records management standards within the last 12
months.
No
Creating and Capturing Records
Good Practice Statement
Indicator
Findings
The system must be capable of:
Capturing records in all formats as well as converting records from
one format to another if required.
CCAS can handle documents in Office 2003 applications and PDF.
Assigning unique identifiers to the records that will remain unchanged
as long as the records exist.
It is not possible to assign the same number to two records.
Yes
Supporting and applying security and access controls during the
process of capturing records to ensure that the records are protected
from unauthorised access, alteration and destruction/deletion.
Access controls are automatically or manually assigned to complete the
creation and capture of a record.
Through passwords and access limitation.
Managing and Maintaining Records
Good Practice Statement
Indicator
Findings
The system must be capable of:
Validating metadata, for example against a range of pre-defined values
such as a classification scheme.
The system is designed to control the selection of metadata from
pre-defined values (e.g., in relation to classification of records).
Yes
Creating rules to control the selection of metadata.
The system has the functionality to create rules to control the
selection of metadata (e.g., in relation to classification of
records).
Yes
Assigning appropriate retention and disposition rules to records
during record creation.
To complete the creation and capture of a record, a retention rule
must be assigned.
No
Creating and maintaining an audit trail that tracks user access to
records contained within or managed by the system
There is an audit trail that tracks access to the records contained
within or managed by the system. Whenever a user accesses a record
audit metadata is created. This audit metadata includes at least the
date and time of access and the user’s ID.
Yes
Providing an easy method of checking the audit trails for changes to
records and records’ metadata within the system.
A system audit is carried out every six months. This audit examines
the audit trail for any changes made to records and records’ metadata.
Yes
Managing Hybrid Records
Good Practice Statement
Indicator
Findings
ICT systems that manage hybrid records must be capable of:
Searching for and retrieving all physical, hybrid and digital records
registered by the system.
System rules are consistent for physical, hybrid and digital records
(e.g., records are labeled or described for searching and retrieval
purposes).
System is for tracking physical files, e-documents and court
decisions.
Searching, Accessing and Retrieving Records
Good Practice Statement
Indicator
Findings
The system must be capable of:
Retrieving and listing a set of digital records and associated
metadata that meet the search criteria.
At least two criteria may be used to search for records in the same
system, either using the record content or its metadata (e.g., unique
identification number, date of creation and capture, record type, user
ID of creator).
Yes
Restricting the definition and maintenance of access and security
controls to an authorised system administrator.
Responsibility for managing access controls is assigned to a
designated member of staff or office.
Administrator
Supporting central management of access and security controls;
applying these controls to users, records and associated metadata.
There are documented standards and procedures for applying system
access controls.
Yes
Retaining and Disposing of Records
Good Practice Statement
Indicator
Findings
The system must be capable of:
Providing backup for all records and the records’ metadata within the
system.
*
There is a daily backup of all system data
*
The backup is stored externally from the main system.
Yes
Enabling an authorised individual to create, maintain, modify and
manage retention and disposition rules.
A designated member of staff or office has documented responsibility
for managing retention and disposition rules.
No
Applying retention instructions to records and triggering the
appropriate disposition event when the retention period expires.
There are documented policies and procedures for assigning retention
and disposition instructions to records.
No
Creating an audit trail of records retention and disposition rules and
actions; enabling an authorised individual to carry out regular
audits.
There is a documented audit of records retention and disposition rules
and actions at least every 12 months.
No
Retaining and Disposing of Records
Good Practice Statement
Indicator
Findings
The system or application must be capable of:
Capturing information in a structured format so as to create an
electronic record.
Yes
Connecting with an ICT system that has integrated records management
functionality as set out Category 3 in such a way that records are
captured and managed effectively,
OR
Connecting with an ICT system designed specifically for records
management (eg an EDRMS) in such a way that records are captured and
managed effectively.
Records generated through the e-Government system or application are
present in the ICT / records management system.
No
Analysis of Record Management Integration in CCAS
The ICT Committee of the Uganda Judiciary has implemented the Court
Case Administration System (CCAS) in some courts, including the
Commercial Court in Kampala. The system has approximately 60 users. It
is designed to automate the case management process, facilitating the
registration and retrieval of case information.
In 2008, the system was upgraded when the Commercial Court moved from
Office 97 to Office 2003. The system is now only compatible with
Windows 2003 and stores only documents in Office 2003 formats and PDF.
While a system with full records management functionality would be
able to retain e-records in their original formats, the Court is
rarely required to store records in formats other than Office 2003 and
PDF formats. However, this may present a challenge when the system is
expected to store attachments to e-mails, for example. Staff stated
that the migration of data during this upgrade was documented, but it
is unclear how many of the existing electronic records were migrated
and what arrangements have been made for the storage and long-term
access to those records that were not migrated. There are no rules or
guidance on the disposal of records kept in the system and no disposal
scheduling functionality. Further, there is no long-term planning for
further upgrades and migrations, which may be ad hoc and suggests that
a strategic approach to managing records over time is not being taken.
These issues have not been considered in the design of the system,
which is a direct result of the lack of records management inputs at
the earliest stages of system design. No records management
specialists were involved in the design of the system, records
management did not feature as an aspect of project planning risk
assessments or process mapping exercises, and no international records
management standards were referenced.
Nevertheless, some records management issues were highlighted in the
ICT policies of the Judiciary and the Commercial Court in particular,
which has resulted in attempts to manage e-records through CCAS and
connectivity with the DBMS. CCAS therefore compares well with other
case management systems in use in the region. For example, electronic
records are assigned unique identifiers and pre-defined metadata terms
and rules are used, which aid searching and retrieval.
The administration of the system also reflects the connections made at
the policy level. The ICT unit has responsibility for the functioning
of the system, while the Secretary to the Judiciary has responsibility
for the information contained in the system. Requests for user
profiles are made to the Registry and, if approved, sent to the ICT
unit for action. Each user is given a unique identification number and
a confidential password. Access protocols are in place and changes to
the security schema must be approved by an ad hoc committee convened
to consider proposed changes.
Data verification is undertaken by the officer in charge of the
Registry, according to procedure. The system has an audit trail
function that tracks versions. The system is able to generate reports
and produce statistics on usage, including:
*
templates for various legal documents that are regularly produced
by the Courts
*
cause list - the public Court sittings schedule
*
proceedings reports - brief summaries of cases
*
pending cases reports - specifying all pending cases per judicial
officer
*
completed cases reports - specifying all cases closed in a
particular period per judicial officer
*
statistical reports listing the number of cases at each stage of
the judicial process and the time they have been at that stage.
This working relationship between the Court’s ICT team and registry
staff is further evidence that ICT and records management have been
recognised as vital and complementary components in the management of
electronic records. Though CCAS does not meet international good
practice standards for electronic records management, some key
functionality is present in the system and the registry and ICT teams
have complementary roles in the administration of the system. It is
likely that this alignment is attributable to the inclusion of records
management issues in the ICT policies.
Conclusion
The Judiciary in Uganda is moving towards an integrated digital
working environment. However, many of the processes of the Commercial
Court, for example, are still manual and hard copy records are still
widely used. Rather than attempt to automate all workflows and
digitise all records, the designers of CCAS have allowed for partial
electronic working by enabling the system to connect hard copy and
electronic records. This suggests a staged approach to
computerisation.
CCAS would not comply with international standards for the integration
of records management functionality in electronic systems, but has
partial records management functionality, such as version control,
data security controls, and audit functionality. The major flaw in
CCAS is a lack of retention and disposal scheduling functionality, an
issue that has persisted from the paper environment.
Together with the shared responsibilities for the administration of
the system, this reflects a partial synthesis between records
management and ICT in the ICT policies that have informed the design,
implementation and ongoing management of the system. Increased
alignment between these two areas would arguably result in a closer
alignment at lower levels, such as system design and management,
resulting in stronger systems better able to manage electronic records
securely over time.
5