Session
Artificial Intelligence (AI) made it way in almost every possible aspect of human life: from daily routine to complex decision-making processes. And judiciary system is no exception. For example, in 2023 in Columbia ChatGPT was first used in making a court decision: a judge turned to AI when deciding on compensation for insurance payments. The chatbot formulated a decision for the judge, providing him with links to the practice and explanations of the local Supreme Court. In this case, the plaintiff was satisfied and the decision seemed fair, what if it was vice versa?
The jury is still out on the matter. On the one hand, AI can analyze extensive legal datasets swiftly, providing invaluable insights while prompting critical discussions regarding regulatory frameworks to govern these technologies. Proponents of this theory also believe that AI will help with automatization of screening processes and in time a complicated AI model would be able to make unbiased judgment on any case as a judge. For instance, such a thing is widely used in China: ML-based system is connected to the desk of every judge in the country and help them with cases by developing legal arguments and correcting alleged human errors in the judicial act. In case of disagreement with AI, judges are required to submit written objections.
Others disagree stating that there are still risks of algorithmic bias and the potential for perpetuating systemic inequalities. As AI systems are often trained on historical data, which may reflect existing societal biases and inequalities, these beliefs can be inherited and even amplified by AI tools, leading to unjust outcomes in sentencing, case evaluations, and other critical judicial decisions. And the main question arises: will AI be able to ever understand how intertwined are the principles of justice and humanism in sentencing, and the spirit of a law itself?
Apart from ethical concerns, there are also cybersecurity and regulation. AI would require access to vast amounts of sensitive data, raising concerns about how this information is collected, stored, and utilized (especially in court). Ensuring that individuals' rights are protected while leveraging data for AI applications poses a complex challenge both for lawmakers and legal practitioners. Needless to say, that the regulatory framework is still needed to govern this technology.
As the session progresses, participants will engage in a collaborative dialogue focused on developing robust regulatory approaches to ensure ethical AI usage in the judiciary. Experts from diverse backgrounds will share their perspectives on creating standards that prioritize justice and equity in an increasingly digital landscape.
This session promises to be an engaging and thought-provoking exploration of the opportunities and challenges presented by AI in the judicial system. Attendees will leave with a deeper understanding of the responsibilities that accompany technological advancements and a commitment to fostering integrity and foresight in the pursuit of justice.
Main Questions:
- What are the ethical dilemmas about usage AI in legal system? What are the possible ways out?
- How to regulate this edge-cutting technology?
- Can AI be fully unbiased, especially in this sensitive matter?
- Should there be any limits to usage of technology: for example, only for screening?
- How can AI help and what harm can it make?
- Who will benefit from AI on judiciary?
- Will the judge as a human profession disappear?
Moderator:
Eliamani Laltaika, Judge, High Court of Tanzania, United Republic of Tanzania
Speakers:
Alexandra Kozina, Lawyer in dispute resolution, ART DE LEX
Milos Jovanovic, President, OpenLink Group
Gabriella Marcelja, CEO, SG Impact Ventures AG
Becky Burr, Member of the Board of Directors, ICANN
Khaled Fattal, Chairman, MLi Group
Anda Bologa, Digital Innovation Fellow, Center for European Policy Analysis
Reference Materials - UNESCO’s Capacity Building Programme on AI for the Judiciary:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|