Access to Justice in 2025: What Does the Year Ahead Hold?

Written by Jennifer Leitch, NSRLP Executive Director; originally published on Slaw, Canada’s online legal magazine.

As we contemplate 2025, the NSRLP is considering how to tackle the ongoing challenges in access to justice. While the barriers facing individuals attempting to access justice remain many, it is challenging to consider where the focus on improving access should be directed, given limited resources and capacity. Moreover, the coming year is likelier than not to have a fair share of political, social, and economic upheaval, all of which may also serve to impact access to justice in both anticipated and unanticipated ways. Thus, thinking about where the NSRLP goes next is a necessary exercise, and one requiring flexibility as we anticipate and respond to various socio-political conditions.

The growth of AI

Artificial intelligence (AI) and its impact on access to justice remains front of mind. The speed at which AI is developing is astounding, and understanding AI in its current iterations, as well considering its future prospects for access to justice, is crucial. The NSRLP seeks to better understand how AI may or may not be deployed by self-represented litigants (SRLs), how it may assist or undermine their attempts to access justice, as well as how public awareness might be brought to the topic. The legal profession and legal institutions are clearly engaging with AI, making it all the more imperative that SRLs not be left further behind. There is currently a lack of public legal education around the use of AI in the justice system, and we must consider what format such education might take, and what content the public, and specifically SRLs, can benefit from – perhaps particularly pitfalls they might encounter and how to avoid them when using AI, as well what AI legal tools currently exist for public use. Given the increasing availability of sophisticated legal AI tools for legal professionals, we must also consider how this may serve to widen the justice gap further, and what can be done to address these issues in both the short and longer term.

The need for ongoing research

Continuing to engage in user-centric research exploring the challenges faced by SRLs and the ways in which civil justice reform, development of appropriate resources, and public awareness can better support SRLs also remains a key priority. Despite the great need, there remains a dearth of comprehensive research data that measures the scope of self-representation within the civil justice system on a macro scale. This must include a better understanding of where SRLs are most prevalent, as well as the various hurdles they face in specific processes. There is a smattering of data that looks at specific court settings or type of matters, but no complete study of the breadth or depth of self-represented litigants with the legal system. While such research cannot provide us with all the answers, it is crucial in order to effectively engage in conversations about the deployment of resources and the scope of reform.

Moreover, there is also much work to be done on understanding the intersecting realities of certain self-represented litigant communities, in terms of how they are disproportionately impacted by a lack of access to justice, and what they need to be better supported. For instance, the NSRLP’s recent work on virtual hearings highlighted a significant access to justice gap affecting SRLs with disabilities. In that report we noted that advances in technology and the move of many adjudicative processes online (motivated by the pandemic) did not assist persons with disabilities, and in some instances served to further impede their ability to participate in proceedings. As many adjudicative contexts continue to adopt technology and undertake virtual processes, it is necessary that the particular needs and concerns of especially vulnerable SRLs are identified and properly considered in plans moving forward.

Effective resources for the public

In another example of the justice gap disproportionately affecting vulnerable communities, it remains the case that much access to justice information and assistance is primarily directed toward English-speaking litigants. While there are obviously individuals and select groups that provide assistance in a host of languages other than English, more translation of information and assistance is needed across the country. Again, in light of various examples of intersectional marginalization, the very individuals who are in most need of access to justice information and support are typically unable to access help in their language of understanding. Such resources must be informed by a user-centric approach that takes seriously the imperative to build processes and develop resources that speak to the specific needs of those accessing justice, and at the same time, engage those same litigants (SRLs particularly) in the ongoing evaluation of processes and resources.

Additionally, as we continue to see the growth of legal information resources (aided immensely by AI), it is important to examine how legal information might be made more accessible and be better supported. Information and resources directed at addressing a host of legal questions and issues must be underpinned by opportunities for SRLs to seek clarification about the information they secure. Particularly in the case of AI-generated legal information it is imperative that litigants be able to confirm the accuracy of the information they find (we note that the NSRLP’s SRL intake survey results reflect this need). Consistent with theories of adult education, it is important for individuals engaging with legal information sources to have opportunities for dialogue with experts to reinforce understanding of the information relayed and encourage its effective use.

This presents a significant challenge for access to justice: the dissemination of accurate and accessible public legal information continues to grow, and this is a great achievement in access to justice, but how do we develop programming and initiatives that facilitate individuals’ abilities to engage with the legal material they find in an active fashion? For example, where might there be opportunities for individuals accessing legal information to develop a deeper and more useful understanding of the information through question and answer with trusted experts? This should include opportunities to work out the details and complexities of a legal issue, or the process involved in resolving that issue, as well as more comprehensive public civil discourse on law and legal institutions.

The NSRLP will be considering and engaging in projects to address all of these issues throughout 2025, and we encourage our colleagues and supporters to do the same.