Technology should not make us do away with court-based oral litigation

Oral advocacy remains a vital part of courtroom practice despite the growing use of digital justice systems. [File Courtesy]

Many Kenyans have been following the Gachagua impeachment case keenly via television screens like students in a classroom. Young advocates have watched different counsel rise, pause, persuade, and answer difficult questions from either side. Law students have followed every interruption, every objection, and every citation. Even ordinary citizens who have never entered a courtroom have begun to understand that litigation is not limited to documents. It extends to advocacy, presence, timing, persuasion and perhaps much more. This moment has reminded the legal profession of something important.

Technology is necessary in modern judicial management and trial by written submissions, but it should not completely replace physical oral advocacy. Courts must embrace digital systems without losing the traditions that give advocacy its character and public meaning. Across the world, courts have adopted technology to improve efficiency. Electronic filing, virtual hearings, digital cause lists, online judgments, and automated scheduling have reduced delay and unnecessary movement. During the COVID-19 pandemic period, many courts survived because of technology. In Kenya and other Commonwealth jurisdictions, lawyers could file pleadings from their offices and attend mentions through video links. Litigants saved transport costs, and judges managed files more quickly.