This paper argues for a fundamental reconceptualization of justice as a digital service rather than a physical venue, examining Colombia's transformation from paper-based legal procedures to an AI-enhanced digital justice ecosystem. Through analysis of Colombia's pre-pandemic digital judicial framework, COVID-19-accelerated adaptations, and emerging AI applications in legal decision-making, I demonstrate how technological integration can democratize justice by removing geographic, financial, and structural barriers that traditionally restrict access to legal services, particularly in underserved areas.

The study advances a strategic framework for implementing a justice-as-a-service model that enhances efficiency, quality, consistency, and accessibility through the digital transformation of judicial infrastructure. I propose that effectively designed judicial cyberspace must seamlessly merge analog and digital environments while adhering to foundational principles that ensure the protection of fundamental rights, including functional equivalence, authenticity, integrity, accessibility, interoperability, due process, privacy, and information security.

Drawing on empirical analysis of Colombia's pioneering use of generative AI in legal decision-making, I introduce the concept of "legal multiplicity" as a framework for the future of adjudication—one that integrates the "qualia of judging" (the irreducible subjective dimensions of human judicial experience) with the computational capabilities of artificial intelligence. Rather than replacing judicial discretion, I argue that judicial modernization should embed constitutional principles in technological architecture, prioritize inclusivity, and apply legal design thinking to create systems that expand access while preserving the essential human dimensions that give law its meaning and purpose.

This paper was originally commissioned by Microsoft and published in Spanish in 2022, examining the digital transformation of Colombia's judicial system during a critical period of technological adoption. While Microsoft funded this research, they granted me complete intellectual independence to develop the perspective I deemed most appropriate for analyzing these complex issues. This version is published with Microsoft’s consent. What you're reading is a distilled version adapted for a broader international audience, with updated sources and expanded analysis throughout.

Notably, Sections V and VI are entirely new additions not included in the original publication. These sections—exploring artificial intelligence in legal decision-making and presenting lessons from Colombia's experience with global applications—represent my latest thinking on legal multiplicity and the integration of AI in judicial processes. They incorporate recent case studies and theoretical frameworks developed after the original version was published, reflecting the rapidly evolving intersection of technology, law, and access to justice.

In the spirit of transparency and consistent with the paper's concept of multiplicity, I disclose that various generative AI tools were used in the process of translating, summarizing, and editing this work. This methodological choice was deliberate—a practical embodiment of the complementary human-AI collaboration advocated within these pages. Throughout the development process, I maintained firm human control over content, arguments, and conclusions, while leveraging AI assistance for linguistic refinement and organizational suggestions.