• where millions of people engaged in conversations, not at the local bars, but over keyboards in virtual communities (the social media);
• where digital tracks can be left on computers, phones, digital cameras as well as third party servers belonging to Internet Service Providers (ISPs), and companies that provide services via Internet such as YouTube, Facebook, Gmail;
• where computers not only contain the proof of crimes, but also an alibi for the defence;
• where documents or records of events are stored not just on computers but in the cloud,

the reality of the time poses critical challenge for the bar and the bench as they engage with discovery and evidentiary issues orchestrated by electronically-stored data and their respective uses in our courts, especially when the pre-digital evidence legal framework never envisaged nor contemplated a world anchored on the use of electronics and the electromagnetic spectrum to store, modify and exchange data via networked systems and associated physical infrastructure without regard to physical geography.

Such evidentiary issues raise certain fundamental questions on the evolution of digital evidence, eDiscovery and Law office & client portal automation.

It is obvious that no matter how knowledgeable a digital forensic expert (not also trained as a lawyer) engaged as an expert in providing expertise on technical issues in court, he cannot conduct an examination-in-chief, cross-examine a witness or re-examine a document custodian or computer forensic expert on the other side. This is the province of the lawyer.

For lawyers to engage in effective examination or cross examination of such expert witness in court, they must as a matter of necessity make effective effort towards understanding client’s use of technology, electronic data dynamics, methods, policies and procedures inherent in managing electronically-stored information (ESI).

The lawyer, at all-time material, should be prepared to defend his introduction of computer evidence against all objections and attack such digital evidence produced by opposing counsel where expedient. A working knowledge of the computer, the evidence it can generate, and the evidentiary questions raised, prove invaluable for the bar and the bench in today’s rapidly changing and increasingly automated society.

For the bar and the bench to fit into the emerging concept of digital evidence and eDiscovery and explore the potential knowledge inherent in digital data in streamlining the pre-trial and trial processes, they must in addition to their earlier legal training acquire skills across relevant disciplines.

The ability to apply skills across disciplines comes handy anywhere problem solving is required. To be relevant in this dispensation, the bench and the bar must have basic knowledge of adjacent and connecting fields so as to readily adapt and address the novel and complex problems that often arise.

Therefore, the 21st century bar and bench must possess the “I” shaped and “T” shaped quality skills. The “I”-shaped professional is highly versed in a specific area of expertise, whilst the “T”-shaped professional has broader skills and knowledge and learns by linking up different perspectives from different specialties. Although the bench and the bar have deep legal expertise, they must also have the ability to collaborate across disciplines such as technology and forensics.

It is against this background that this training is categorized into two platforms: foundational (preparatory) course to the certification course representing the second category.