The 22nd International Online Dispute Resolution Forum took place in Bangalore, India on 17 and 18 March 2023. The Forum covered a wide array of themes, including ODR and new-age technologies like conversational AI; ODR’s usage in business, government, grassroots, as well as court-annexed resolution mechanisms; adoption of online resolution by courts; regulating ODR; supporting dispute resolution professionals in the ODR ecosystem, adoption of Digital Public Goods in the ODR ecosystem, amongst other themes. This article aims to share some of the ideas discussed during the Forum by the participants and speakers.

Persons with disability (PwDs) face greater challenges when accessing justice. Traditional means of justice seeking and delivery are complex and PwDs often encounter physical and socio-legal barriers. Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) has been proposed as a more efficient and feasible model for justice delivery for PwDs. In India, people with disabilities face hurdles within the justice system, but is not extensively captured in the literature. Therefore, to provide for a more “accessible” model of justice delivery, we developed a blueprint for ODR for PwDs. We developed a model based on a workshop attended by experts in the field of law, disability, and ODR as part of the Agami International ODR Forum, 2023 held in Bengaluru, India. The workshop gleaned insights into components that would be required to make ODR effective for PwDs. A blueprint for an effective ODR mechanism was created based on these insights, superimposed within the framework of an effective ODR platform created by VIDHI Centre for Legal Policy. Our blueprint reveals considerations of accessibility and inclusivity under each of the components along with procedural and data-driven cognizance. Furthermore, the blueprint highlights different stakeholders and players who are required and/or feed into the system to make ODR for PwDs possible. The motto for, of and by the PwDs pervades through the blueprint to uphold ‘nothing about us, without us’ within the justice system.

The article delves into the intricate process of establishing effective Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) systems within the evolving landscape of EU digital legislation. In this era, we are witnessing a surge in cross-border, multi-lingual disputes in the digital domain, necessitating swift and cost-effective solutions. An ethical, data-driven ODR system, underscoring the significance of open-source solutions is a possible solution to these challenges. Such ODR systems are built upon five essential components: ethical design, dispute resolution rules, enforcement mechanisms, ODR service providers, and technical infrastructure. Furthermore, the article explores the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in ODR systems, clarifying how AI can enhance the resolution of disputes and aid parties in negotiations, court proceedings, and arbitration. An IT architecture that supports decentralized collaboration, data exchange and economic efficiency is vital in the ODR environment. In conclusion, the article offers a forward-looking perspective on the construction of an ethical, data-driven ODR environment that can adapt to the ever-shifting dynamics of digital legal frameworks.

Dispute system design is the study of one or more processes adopted to prevent, manage or resolve a stream of disputes connected to a given organization or institution. In real life, many of us will have opportunities to think about a particular class of disputes – family, landlord-tenant, employment, community, governmental services, business-consumer in brick and mortar offices or online stores. Diverse people may be in a position to design – a computer programmer, a user, a consumer advocate, a dispute settlement provider, a lawyer, a mediator or an organizational leader.

Discussions of digital sovereignty predominate artificial intelligence (AI) discourses. However, digital sovereignty has been unable to effectively respond to longstanding concerns regarding the use of AI. These challenges include systemic bias, transparency/accountability and intellectual property infringement/theft. The authors posit an alternative framework – informational sovereignty – encouraging a recalibration of how technological sovereignty is viewed. Through this model emphasis is placed on respecting jurisdictional boundaries and jurisdictionally appropriate information sources to result in representative outcomes for communities rather than the traditional focus on where the data is held and system reliability that has thus far been the subject of much high-profile litigation. The article therefore sets out a quadripartite model of informational sovereignty encompassing concerns regarding population, territory, recognition and regulation of borders, before analysing the place of informational sovereignty in future iterations of AI regulation, including its practical applicability in the European Union Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act).

The rapid adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) and advanced health technologies raise critical challenges around privacy, bias, and access to data. This proliferation also creates a justice gap - patients lack accessible recourse for emerging disputes. Integrating online dispute resolution (ODR) systems into healthcare’s digital infrastructure could provide a timely, patient-centered solution. ODR gives individuals agency to efficiently resolve conflicts through transparent, explanatory processes adapted to medical contexts. Without relying on litigation or regulatory bodies, ODR embedded in patient portals and apps can address disputes over AI diagnostics, electronic records, wearable data misuse, and insurance discrimination. Thoughtfully designed ODR puts control directly in patients’ hands, closing the justice gap. With appropriate oversight and design considerations, ODR can empower patients with self-advocacy as healthcare rapidly digitizes.

There are two critical assumptions for improving access to online justice: (i) effective control of data by those who generate the data; and (ii) symetric relation between the parties. Based on these critical assumptions, new approaches to e-justice ODR procedures and new AI based publicly available services should be adopted as well as new online technology. Not only the ODR institutions but even the parties, including people and importantly also persons with digital disadvantages, will have their own independent online platforms with their data storages, personalized ODR forms continuously improved by new AI-based services and asynchronous digital communication among platforms at a mass scale. Such platforms will be defined as VAPs (Virtual Agent Platforms). Thanks to the possibility for the parties to personalize their VAPs, it will be easier and more efficient to achieve diversity by design in access to online justice as the collaboration among users-data generators will provide a crucial asset.