What digital justice transformation can learn from coordination, workflow and governed AI
A person moving through the justice system experiences one journey. The organisations involved, however, often work across different systems, processes and responsibilities.
A victim or witness may have to repeat information; a practitioner may spend time chasing updates; and a service leader may struggle to see where a case has stalled. Beyond the systems, processes and procedures, there is a human side to every justice journey—someone waiting for justice, looking for answers and hoping for clarity during an already difficult time.
That challenge framed “One Justice Journey, Many Systems,” a masterclass delivered by Adam Pink, Business Transformation Director at Pega, at Digital Justice & Policing 2026 in Glasgow. The discussion explored a question relevant to justice and policing, but also to any public service that relies on multiple organisations: how do you make a journey feel connected when its systems, decisions and responsibilities are distributed?
The answer is not necessarily to replace every system or launch a large transformation programme. It starts by looking at how work moves across the boundaries between them. Because behind every case is a person whose life may be affected by delays, uncertainty and decisions that cannot wait.
The problem is bigger than disconnected data
Connecting systems is important, but information exchange alone does not guarantee that a case progresses. Someone still needs to know what happens next, who is responsible, what information is missing, whether a deadline is approaching and when an exception needs attention.
This is the difference between integration and orchestration. Integration helps systems exchange information. Orchestration coordinates the work that follows: it can make the journey’s current position visible, route actions to the right people, manage deadlines and exceptions, coordinate communications and preserve an end-to-end audit trail.
Integration moves information. Orchestration moves the journey.
The aim is not one system for every organisation. It is to help existing systems, services and people work together more coherently. That means designing around the journey a person experiences, not only around the structures of the organisations delivering it.
Three perspectives reveal where journeys break down
The masterclass considered the same journey through three lenses:
- For a victim or witness, the question might be, “Why do I have to explain this again?”
- For a frontline practitioner, “Where is the latest information, and what should happen next?”
- For a service leader, “Where is the journey becoming stuck, and who owns the intervention?”
These questions show why process design cannot be treated as a purely technical exercise. A better journey needs timely information, clear ownership and visible next actions, but it also needs the people who use and deliver the service to help define what good looks like. Improvements should be judged by whether they reduce avoidable friction for people and practitioners, and whether progress and accountability become clearer.
AI needs a job description
AI can support a coordinated journey, but it should not be introduced without a defined role. The central idea is that – AI needs a job description.
Workflow should establish context, data, rules, authority, and escalation paths. Within those boundaries, AI can help people understand information, prepare material, recommend next steps, and monitor activity. People remain accountable for judgement, decisions, exceptions, and outcomes.
For example, AI might help prepare a case summary, flag missing information or draft a communication for a practitioner to review. The appropriate role depends on the task and its consequences. Human oversight, clear controls, and escalation routes are particularly important where decisions can significantly affect people. The objective is not to automate judgement away, but to give practitioners better context and reduce avoidable administrative effort.
What international examples can, and cannot, tell us
The masterclass highlighted international examples of coordinated digital justice. In New Jersey, Pega-supported processes reduced defendant processing time from three hours to 20 minutes, supporting over 40,000 law-enforcement officers and 2,500 court staff.
Spain uses eight Pega-powered judicial applications, while Saudi Arabia applies Pega to court management and hearing coordination. New South Wales’ Drug Court demonstrates collaboration across justice, health and rehabilitation services.
These examples are not evidence that one model can simply be transplanted into Scotland. The legal, operational and organisational context matters.
For Scotland’s public sector leaders, the real takeaway is to identify where similar approaches could address local challenges, strengthen collaboration between agencies and help frontline practitioners deliver more timely, effective services. The opportunity lies in applying these lessons to Scotland’s own justice priorities, rather than replicating another country’s model.
Start with one journey, then prove what works
A practical route forward is to begin with one journey where there is a clear human or operational problem, rather than starting with a technology choice or attempting to transform everything at once. The masterclass outlined a sequence:
- Choose a journey. Select one with a visible human or operational problem.
- Bring the right people together. Include practitioners, service users, policy owners, operational leaders and technologists.
- Create a shared blueprint. Map the workflows, roles, information, systems, decisions and controls required.
- Prove a focused end-to-end improvement. Test a small but complete slice across the organisational boundaries that matter.
- Learn and reuse. Measure the result and reuse successful components where they fit.
A tool such as Pega Blueprint can support the shared-design stage, making the journey and its moving parts visible to the people involved.
But the sequence matters: agree on the problem and desired outcome first, design the workflow with the right stakeholders, and then test whether the change has helped. Measurement should be built in from the beginning, so the decision to extend the approach is based on evidence rather than enthusiasm alone.
A principle to take forward
For Scotland, the question is not whether every justice organisation should adopt the same system. It is where better coordination across existing systems and services could make the greatest difference and how that improvement can be demonstrated in practice. The answer will depend on Scottish Government’s own priorities, responsibilities and operating context.
The wider lesson is relevant well beyond justice: when a service crosses organisational boundaries, improving each part individually may not be enough. The experience depends on how well the parts work connected.