Bridging Sovereignty and Access: Rethinking International Mechanisms for Cross-border Data in Litigation

As data has become increasingly important in civil and commercial litigation, access to electronic evidence often involves cross-border data transfers. This situation frequently leads to conflicts between court-ordered disclosure and domestic data governance rules. Existing international coordination mechanisms, such as the Hague Evidence Convention and various soft-law frameworks, were not developed to respond to the compulsory and adversarial nature of litigation involving digital data. This paper uses a doctrinal and comparative analysis to examine the limits of current international frameworks for cross-border data access in litigation, focusing on procedural inefficiency, sovereignty-based restrictions, and the weak legal effect of soft-law instruments. The analysis shows that both treaty-based mechanisms and non-binding initiatives offer limited practical solutions when courts require compulsory disclosure of data across jurisdictions. On this basis, the paper discusses several emerging approaches, including neutral data escrow mechanisms, localized access models, the broader use of standard contractual clauses, and possible reforms of the Hague Evidence Convention. It argues that although no single approach can fully resolve existing compliance conflicts, a combined use of technical, contractual, and institutional measures may help improve cross-border judicial cooperation while respecting data sovereignty and regulatory requirements.