Navigating ECLI and PACER: A technical guide to accessing international legal records
A scalable methodology for OSINT researchers to bridge the gap between the European e-Justice Portal and U.S. federal litigation databases
Investigative journalism often hinges on the “paper trail”. Digital footprints can give us hints, but court and legal records are the official, sworn, and verified proof we need to hold influential people accountable. This tutorial shows you a standard way to search these complicated databases for court cases, property records, and administrative filings.
1. Introduction and context
1.1. The investigative need
Court records represent the gold standard of evidence. Compared with social media or leaked documents, court filings provide sworn testimony and judicially verified facts. For members of the Eurovision News Spotlight network, these kinds of records are important for proving that false information is false, tracking money across borders, and holding international organisations accountable with legally binding documents in more than one country.
1.2. Learning outcomes
Navigate the ECLI system in Europe and the PACER system in the U.S.
Execute advanced searches in international human rights and trade databases.
Implement a SHA-256 hashing workflow for preserving digital evidence.
Ethically use AI to translate and cluster complex legal dockets in multiple languages.
1.3. Case study hook
A European energy firm is accused of human rights abuses in Southeast Asia. While their local filings are “clean”, a search of the US federal courts (PACER) reveals a deposition from a former executive, while the European Court of Human Rights (HUDOC) contains a related petition from local villagers, together forming a global map of corporate liability.
💡 2. Foundational theory and ethical-legal framework
2.1. Key terminology
ECLI (European Case Law Identifier): A standard code used to find judgements across EU member states (e.g.,
ECLI:EU:C:2024:123).Docket/Registry: The central log of all filings in a case; your primary “table of contents” for an investigation.
Service of Process: Official notice that a legal action has begun, often containing the initial “complaint” with the most detailed allegations.
Passive vs. Active OSINT: Browsing public registries (passive) vs. filing Freedom of Information (FOI) requests to trigger the release of records (active).
⚠️ 2.2. Ethical and legal boundaries
2.2.1. Consent & privacy
In Europe, GDPR Article 85 provides a “journalistic exemption” for processing personal data, but this is a privilege, not a right.
The Rule: If you find a home address or a minor’s name in a public filing, redact it before publication unless its disclosure is essential to the public interest.
2.2.2. Legal considerations
Access rules vary wildly. In the U.S., most records are public for a fee; in many EU states, you may need to prove “legitimate interest.” Never use stolen credentials to bypass a paywall.
Disclaimer: Legal frameworks change rapidly. Consult with your newsroom’s legal department before publishing sensitive materials.
🛠️ 3. Applied methodology: step-by-step practical implementation
3.1. Required tools & setup
European e-Justice Portal: The primary gateway for all 27 EU national registries.
RECAP Extension: A must-have for US PACER searches; it shares paid dockets for free.
OCCRP Aleph: A massive global database of leaked and official legal records.
Multilingual LLM (Local): For translating legal documents without uploading them to public servers.
👷♀️ 3.2. Practical execution (The “How”)
Scenario: Auditing a target’s global litigation exposure To build a global profile, move from international “hubs” down to national registries.
Step-by-step workflow:
Map the Entities: Identify every subsidiary and director of your target using OpenCorporates.
Check the “Hubs”: Search Curia (EU), HUDOC (Europe-wide), and PACER (US). These high-level courts often reference smaller local cases.
Local Deep-Dive: Use the e-Justice Portal to find the specific national court. In the UK, use The National Archives (Caselaw); in France, use Légifrance.
Extract Exhibits: Don’t just read the judgement. Look for “Exhibits” or “Annexes” — this is where the internal emails and bank records are hidden.
💾 3.3. Data preservation and chain of custody
In OSINT journalism, you must prove the document existed at the time you found it.
Step 1: Download the PDF.
Step 2: Generate a SHA-256 Hash.
Command (Terminal):shasum -a 256 filename.pdfStep 3: Save the hash and timestamp in a “Master Evidence Log”.
🧠 4. Verification and analysis for reporting
4.1. Corroboration strategy
A court filing is a “claim”, not necessarily a “fact”. Cross-reference allegations with:
Land Registries: To verify if the property mentioned in a suit actually exists.
Social Media Footprinting: Verify if a witness’s location on a specific date (via Instagram/LinkedIn) matches their sworn testimony.
🤖 4.3. AI assistance in analysis
For Eurovision News Spotlight readers dealing with 24+ languages:
Translation & summarization: Use a private LLM to summarize a 100-page Italian filing into an English bullet-point list of “Key Entities and Dates.”
Relationship Mapping: Use AI to extract every “person” and “organization” from a folder of 50 PDFs to see who appears most frequently (clustering).
⚠️ AI warning: Hallucination risk: AI may misinterpret legal jargon (e.g., confusing “Plaintiff” and “Defendant”). Always manually verify quotes and dates before publication. Never upload confidential source material to public AI models.
🚀 5. Practice and resources
5.1. Practice exercise
The Challenge: Use CourtListener to uncover a case involving a major tech company and “Privacy”. Locate the most recent “Order” signed by a judge. What is the judge’s name, and what was the outcome of the order?
5.2. Advanced resources
e-Justice Portal: The essential map for European court records.
RECAP / CourtListener: The best free resource for US federal records.
Global Investigative Journalism Network (GIJN): Detailed guides for accessing records in specific countries like Russia, China, or Brazil.
Vizlegal: Provides lawyers and legal librarians with access to millions of decisions, court filings, court dates, and other data that they can track or search.
✅ 6. Key takeaways and investigative principles
The “Follow the Exhibit” Rule: The most valuable data is rarely in the judgement; it’s in the attachments.
Standardize Evidence: Always hash your files (SHA-256) to ensure they are court-ready for your own defence.
Think Cross-Border: A lawsuit in one country often triggers a “discovery” process in another.
Verify the Status: Check if a case was appealed or overturned; a “win” in a lower court may have been reversed.
Ethical Redaction: Protect PII (Personally Identifiable Information) that isn’t in the public interest.
👁️ Coming next week…
Deconstructing Websites: Whois and server fingerprinting
Uncover the digital DNA of any website by tracing its ownership history and server metadata. Learn to leverage WHOIS records and SSL fingerprinting to deconstruct a site’s infrastructure.