Since it opened in September, the Beijing Internet Court has accelerated hearing times and improved efficiency.

Unlike most of the trials Liu Shuhan handled in the past, which consumed large amounts of time and energy, the judge in Beijing concluded a case in just 40 minutes last month, and the litigants didn't even have to show up in court.

The hearing-a dispute over an online shopping contract-was conducted online, so the plaintiff and defendant addressed the court via electronic screens.

The innovative trial was held at the Beijing Internet Court, where all the procedures-including case filing, evidence exchange, hearings and delivery of verdicts-are conducted online.

"Thanks to the new way of conducting hearings, I can handle about 50 cases a month. That's double the number I could hear before," said Liu, who has worked for the court since it opened in September.

"Solving cases online can save time and expense for litigants (as they do not have to travel to the court), while improving judicial efficiency and transparency."

With more than 800 million internet users nationwide, e-commerce disputes and online infringements have clogged China's courts in recent years. In response, the first internet court opened in Hangzhou, capital of Zhejiang province, in 2017. Last year, Beijing and Guangzhou, capital of Guangdong province, followed suit.

A recent guideline from the Supreme People's Court, the country's top judicial body, stipulated that online courts would be responsible for hearing internet-related disputes, such as those regarding online loans, purchasing contracts and copyright issues, along with cases involving intellectual property rights.

In February, the top court issued its judicial reform plan for the next five years. The document stated that the dissemination of verdicts online, which has worked effectively in the internet courts, will be extended to more tribunals to cut delivery times.

Gao Zicheng, a lawyer in Beijing, praised the convenience cybercourts bring to litigants, adding that the quicker a dispute is resolved, the better justice can be upheld.

However, Ma Yide, a professor who specializes in intellectual property rights at Zhongnan University of Economics and Law in Hubei province, expressed concern, saying the scope of internet courts should not be expanded too quickly.

Ma said the use of technology and the internet in litigation should be conducted prudently to prevent judicial data from being hacked and to ensure that online hearings are handled in a seemly manner.

Round-the-clock services

After Liu joined the Beijing Internet Court, located in a hi-tech zone in the capital's Fengtai district, she found she was able to devote more time to concentrating on the law and legal issues instead of administrative details as before.

"Several procedures that took a lot of time in lawsuits, such as evidence exchange, are now conducted online, which leaves me more time to analyze disputes and explain rulings to litigants," she said.

Statistics provided by the court show that 3,040 cases were filed between Sept 9, the day it opened, and Dec 31. All the cases were filed via the internet, and 99 percent of them were heard online.

Litigants who wish to bring a case before the court must first set up an online account by using their national identity cards and a facial-recognition system. Provided the litigant's biometric features and the information on their ID card match those registered with the capital's public security bureau, they are allowed to submit their contact details, evidence and other materials related to the case.

"After that, judicial assistants or court clerks send text messages to the litigant's mobile phone advising them of the date and time of the hearing," Liu said. "Before, we informed people by sending written legal notices by post, which took longer. Sometimes the notices were delayed or even lost."

She added that an offline hearing will be arranged if a judge has reason to doubt a litigant's identity.

Litigants are asked to download an app from the court's website to their laptop or mobile phone for use during hearings.

"To ensure the safety and stability of the app or network they will use to follow their hearing, we help them test it the day before the trial," Liu said.

"That means litigants don't have to attend court in person. Instead, they can take part in the hearing, follow the progress of their lawsuit and read court rulings at just about any place they can connect to the internet. If they have problems with litigation or the process, they can contact us online. The Supreme Court's judicial notice stipulates that we must provide timely responses."

On Oct 30, Yang Heping, a lawyer in Beijing, acted in a hearing on behalf of Douyin, a popular online short-video provider, via his laptop while sitting in the company's offices.

Douyin claimed that another online platform had downloaded and broadcast one of its videos without permission, thereby infringing its copyright.

Neither the plaintiff nor the defendant attended the court during the trial. Instead, they used the online platform of the internet court to take part in the hearing and exchange their views and evidence.

"I didn't need to go to the court, irrespective of when the case was filed or heard," Yang said. "Online litigation is very convenient because there are no space or time constraints."

About 10 people file cases in the court every day, and almost every case is heard and ruled upon online.

"That means we can offer legal services without opening or closing times," Liu said, noting that litigants can send judges messages at anytime of the day or night, or even when they are on vacation.

Workload eased

Zhao Changxin, another judge at Beijing's online court, said that in addition to providing greater convenience for litigants, the internet tribunals ease the burden on the judicial system.

Statistics provided by the Beijing High People's Court show that 37,631 internet-related disputes were filed in the capital from January to August last year, a rise of 24.4 percent from 2017.

Traditional methods, such as delivering hearing details or rulings via the postal service, cannot begin to match the internet's fast pace, let alone deal with the surge in the number of cases of this type, Zhao said.

Technologies, such as information-sharing platforms and voice-recognition systems, have been instrumental in improving judicial efficiency and providing effective solutions to the rise in internet-related cases, he added.

Liu echoed that opinion. "For example, the court clerks' workload has been eased, because the voice-recognition system in each courtroom helps them to record trials. Now, their job revolves around checking the records," she said.

When a trial is concluded, the plaintiffs and defendants receive an electronic verdict with a quick response code. "Scanning the code and signing their names online means the ruling has been accepted by both sides," Liu said, adding that the system has alleviated difficulties experienced under the old system.

"In the past, some defendants left unclear addresses, making it hard to find them and send them the rulings. But now, we can follow up online to make sure they have received and read the verdict."

Challenges, concerns

Despite the progress made, a few issues still need to be ironed out. Zhao pointed out that litigants still have to visit the court to collect a physical copy of a ruling if they want to use it as evidence or submit it as material in another lawsuit.

"That means it is essential for us to improve cooperation with other government departments to persuade them to approve the use of judicial information online, so internet rulings will have equal status to physical ones," he said.

For her part, Liu conceded that she is a little anxious about the 24-hour provision of legal services online. "I have to respond to litigants' questions at any time, including weekends and holidays," she said.

"The response system needs to be regulated. Judges can answer questions about the law, but court clerks or judicial assistants should deal with smaller issues."

Gao, the lawyer from Beijing, welcomed the greater judicial openness and efficiency provided by the internet courts, but said the rapid adoption of technologies and improper use of judicial data may also pose security risks.

According to Zhao, not all internet-related cases are suitable for online hearings. For example, it would be better to have face-to-face hearings in cases involving serious conflicts to prevent litigants from blocking the network or closing it down during online trials.

According to Ma, from Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, the most important thing is to balance the relationship between justice and technology.

"We must be prudent when extending cybercourts and online hearings across the country," he said. "After all, the key point about settling a dispute is always justice, not the internet."