Judicial Independence Also Means Independence From Undue AI Influence: Justice BV Nagarathna

Supreme Court judge Justice BV Nagarathna has cautioned that the traditional understanding of judicial independence must adapt to the realities of artificial intelligence, stressing that excessive reliance on AI could subtly influence judicial reasoning and threaten cognitive autonomy.

Addressing the 22nd Biennial State Level Conference of Judicial Officers held in Bengaluru on the theme "Reimagining the Judiciary in the Era of Artificial Intelligence", Justice Nagarathna observed that if judges begin to rely too much on AI, it could create a form of cognitive influence by shaping how humans process information and make decisions.

She said that AI poses a threat to human cognition by subtly shaping how humans process information and make decisions. It equally threatens cognitive autonomy.

"Therefore, the classical idea of judicial independence must evolve to include independence from undue AI influence. This means ensuring that judges retain final control over reasoning and that use of AI remains at the periphery at all times and at all stages. Judicial independence in the modern era is not just freedom from external power, but also freedom from algorithmic influence."

AI-generated fake judgments a threat

Flagging the trend of lawyers citing AI-generated fake precedents,  she suggested that it's time for advocates, who rely upon judicial precedents, to carry a certificate that the judgments they have relied upon are authentic and have been reported in the relevant journals. 

"In view of the reliance being placed on Artificial Intelligence in the course of dispensation of justice, the time has now come for the learned advocates who rely upon the judicial precedents to also issue a certificate that the judgments relied upon are authentic and have been reported in the relevant journals."

She said that in the context of the use of Artifical Intelligence(AI) by advocates in drafting their pleadings. She remarked that there have been frequent instances where AI has produced non-existent case laws and materials, which have been cited by advocates without adequate verification. 

"There have already been instances where AI has produced incorrect or even entirely fabricated case law citations even in the Supreme Court before my Bench, a case was cited titled “Mercy vs. Mankind” which did not exist at all. In another instance, a Supreme Court judgment was relied upon which did not have the particular quotation which was relied upon. This makes verification indispensable or else we would be compromising public trust in the institution."

Justice Nagarathna stated that due diligence becomes so important, as while the use of AI in other sectors may merely cause inconvenience, the errors it may cause in the judicial system can cost a person's life, liberty, and dignity.

Courts Handle Sensitive Information, Possibility Of Data Breach With AI

She raised another pertinent concern regarding privacy and data protection. She said that Courts handle highly sensitive information ranging from personal disputes, financial details, criminal reports, and confidential testimonies, which raises genuine concern regarding possible data breaches.

"This raises the risk of data breaches, misuse, or unauthorized access. Strong safeguards must be in place to ensure that the dignity and privacy of litigants are not compromised in the process of digitization and automation."

At The Core Of Justice Remains Empathy, Compassion: Justice BV Nagarathna

She said that justice involves empathy, compassion, context, and a deep understanding of human life, which a machine can never replicate. Therefore, she warned that it is non-negotiable that even if AI becomes an aid to assist the judiciary, it is the judge who must always decide.

"There is also a broader philosophical concern about the human character of justice. Judicial decision-making is not merely about applying the law. It involves understanding particular context, weighing competing values, and responding to the complexities of human behavior. There is a moral and empathetic dimension to judging that no machine can replicate. If technology begins to influence the process too deeply, there is a risk that justice may become overly mechanical, losing the human sensitivity that is essential to fairness."

The event also saw the presence of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Siddaramaiah, Chief Minister of Karnataka; Justice Aravind Kumar, Justice Vibhu Bhakru, Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court and other members of the judicial fraternity.