GetJustly
Digital legal infrastructure for people who cannot access or afford counsel.
Read by Legal aid organizations and institutions serving people who cannot access or afford a lawyer.
- Mobile
- Web console
Guidance, evidence, and counsel delivered where people are.
The problem
Most people facing a civil legal problem, a wrongful eviction, an unpaid wage claim, a custody dispute, never get in front of a lawyer.
Access to justiceMost people facing a civil legal problem, a wrongful eviction, an unpaid wage claim, a custody dispute, never get in front of a lawyer. Not because the law has no answer for them, but because the path to a lawyer, or even to knowing what their situation calls for, is slow, unclear, or simply unreachable from where they are.
The evidence that would support their case is often scattered across messages, photos, and documents with no continuous record of where it came from or whether it was altered, which weakens it long before anyone with legal training ever sees it.
What we built
GetJustly
Afrikabal designed and built GetJustly as a set of connected surfaces: AI legal guidance calibrated to local statute, an encrypted evidence vault with chain of custody, a verified counsel network, and case management tying the three together. It's delivered over WhatsApp, a mobile app, and a web console for institutions.
- 01
AI legal guidance calibrated to local statute, scoped to point someone toward the right next step rather than offer a general answer.
- 02
An encrypted evidence vault with chain of custody, so evidence a person collects has a continuous, verifiable history.
- 03
A verified counsel network connecting a guided case to a real, checked lawyer when one is needed.
- 04
Case management linking guidance, evidence, and counsel across the life of a case.
- 05
Delivery over WhatsApp, mobile, and a web console for the institutions running the service.
Engineering notes
Why WhatsApp is a delivery surface, not an afterthought
For a lot of the people this is built for, WhatsApp is already the primary way they communicate, and installing a new app is itself a barrier. Treating it as a first-class delivery surface, alongside mobile and web, meant designing the guidance flow to work within a chat interface's constraints from the start, not bolting a chatbot onto a product designed for a full screen.
Chain of custody in the evidence vault
Evidence loses value if a court or counsel can't tell whether it's been altered since it was collected. The vault encrypts what's stored and keeps an append-only record of who added or accessed it and when, so its history, not just its content, can be verified later.
Separating guidance from counsel as distinct trust layers
AI legal guidance and an actual lawyer's advice carry different weight and different liability. Keeping them as separate layers in the system, guidance that points someone toward the right process, and a verified counsel network for when the situation needs a real lawyer, avoids conflating a scoped tool with legal representation.
Statute calibration as a schema problem
Local statute isn't one thing; guidance that's accurate in one jurisdiction can be wrong in another. Calibrating guidance to local statute means treating jurisdiction as a first-class, typed part of the data model that every guidance rule and case record carries, not a configuration flag set once for a whole deployment.
Building something like this?
The first conversation is a fit assessment: what you are trying to enable, where we could plug in, and whether the shapes match. No sales script.