Opinion: We must talk about better justice systems

In his report “Our Common Agenda,” the United Nations secretary-general refers to an “ever deeper crisis of trust” and a “frayed social contract.” The 12,000 leaders that the World Economic Forum surveyed for “The Global Risks Report 2022” saw the rising risks of “social cohesion erosion” and “livelihood crises.” Writing about the “2022 Edelman Trust Barometer” report, Edelman’s CEO says that distrust “is now society’s default emotion” and that societal fears are becoming more acute.

In their recently updated “Global Economic Prospects” and “World Economic Outlook” reports, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund highlight the risk of social disruption, based on worrying economic scenarios for emerging economies and the developing world. Oxfam International concludes that the low- and middle-income country groups are bearing the brunt of the situation the world is in.

Protests are on the rise the world over. People say that they can’t take it anymore. They don’t feel heard. They don’t feel seen.

Rarely has the lack of trust been so visible. A full explanation goes beyond the limits of this piece, yet some causes are obvious: the disruption and fear connected with the COVID-19 pandemic; the economic downturn; the lack of safety nets. Many, already at the lower end of the income scale, fear losing their jobs, homes, and land; falling back into the informal economy; and becoming subject to corruption and violence.

A well-functioning justice system — in the broadest sense of the term — can provide some degree of fairness, especially in times of crisis. It is the place where conflicts are resolved, rights can be invoked, frustrations may be channeled, and violence can be prevented. It strengthens trust in institutions and between people.

A new, people-centered approach that puts people and their needs — not institutions and processes — at the core of justice points to four concrete actions that can be taken.

First, governments, multilateral donors, and philanthropists should invest in building capacity to collect and share data about people’s justice problems and experiences. Which justice problems do people have? Who are these people, in terms of gender, age, income group, education level, and geography? What do they do to prevent or resolve those problems? Do they get satisfactory outcomes?

With such data, justice sector leaders can prioritize and measure effectiveness. Countries like Argentina, Canada, and Niger are doing this. Survey tools that measure these needs have been developed by, for example, the World Justice Project, the Open Government Partnership, and The Hague Institute for Innovation of Law, and these can be further systematized and scaled.

Second, the justice sector needs to invest in building the capacity of justice professionals to do evidence-based work. Too many justice interventions are based on decades-old procedures and are generic. Specialization is better: What works best to resolve a neighbor problem does not automatically apply to a land problem.

As in the health sector, justice practitioners must capture and share which interventions work best to prevent and resolve the most common problems people face. This is also being done, for example, with efforts around reducing recidivism and juvenile delinquency, in which interventions are tested, applied, and disseminated. In Uganda, guidelines on what works best for family justice problems have been developed.

Third, governments, multilateral donors, philanthropists, and impact investors should invest in innovation, focused on only one thing: to get the justice interventions that work best to as many people as possible, as efficiently as possible. Traditional courts and law firms are not always the most effective delivery models. Local justice centers, user-friendly contracts, and platforms to help people claim access to public services are examples of such people-centered game-changers. They can be adapted, upgraded, and scaled.

Fourth, mainly governments — specifically justice ministries — need to invest in an enabling environment to make this happen. Over the past two years, more justice leaders than ever have come together to work on a much-needed transformation of the sector and to develop people-centered justice approaches internationally, regionally, and nationally.

While we are reading more about rising authoritarianism, there is also a movement in the other direction with justice leaders — politicians, judges, lawyers, and academics who see that change is both needed and possible.

Facilitated by the Pathfinders for Justice, the concept of people-centered justice has been developed further over the past three years in a number of high-level gatherings and documents: the Declaration on Equal Access to Justice for All by 2030; the ministerial summits of Oct. 20, 2020, April 14, 2021, and Dec. 6, 2021; a European Union conference on people-centered “e-justice” in April 2021; and the work of the Justice Leaders and The Elders.

Governments that take the achievement of the justice-focused Sustainable Development Goal 16 seriously must work together to strengthen this movement and to develop financing mechanisms at the national and international levels to support it. A number of countries that want to join forces to put people at the center of justice have now formed the Justice Action Coalition to do just that.

Our knowledge base on people-centered justice is growing alongside this political mobilization.

A group of experts from around the world worked together to produce three briefings on justice in a pandemic, analyzing how people-centered justice can play a role in building back better. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development developed a conceptual framework for people-centered justice. Research has been done that brings together the core elements of people-centered justice programming. The concept was also embraced by the U.N. secretary-general in “Our Common Agenda.”

What we need is not rocket science. The core components of what is needed are known, and data shows this is a good investment. In the Netherlands, a first attempt at modeling showed that improved prevention and resolution of justice problems can contribute 0.15% to the gross domestic product structurally. The universal provision of basic justice services in low-income countries is estimated to cost $20 per person per year, compared with $41 for primary and secondary education and $76 for essential health care.

The costs of a breakdown of the social contract dwarf these numbers. Justice sector leaders and large funders need to act. The time to invest in people-centered justice is now.