Hybrid Hearings Are Here To Stay, AI Cannot Replace Human Adjudication : Judges At Chandigarh Panel Discussion

A panel discussion on “Judges: Present and Future” was organised by the Chandigarh International Arbitration Centre in collaboration with Indian International Disputes Week at the Punjab and Haryana High Court.The discussion brought together members of the judiciary from India and abroad to deliberate on the evolving role of judges amid rapid technological advancements in the legal system.The panel featured Justice Arun Monga from Rajasthan High Court, Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj, Justice Harkesh Manuja from P&H High Court, Judge Sukhi Gill , first-tier Tribunal Judge, Ministry of Justice, UK, Judge Manpreet Monica Singh, Civil Court, Texas(US). The session was moderated by Senior Advocate Anand Chhibbar.Post-COVID Digital Transformation of CourtsSpeaking on the impact of technology on the judiciary, Justice Arun Monga said the digitisation of courts accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in a clear “pre- and post-COVID paradigm shift”.“This entire digitalisation happened at the time of Covid. So there has been a pre and post Covid paradigm shift,” he said. He noted that virtual court hearings had significantly improved accessibility, particularly for cross-border legal practice.“Trans-border lawyers can easily come on video conferencing instead of spending money on tickets and being physically present,” Justice Monga said, virtual hearings also help decongest courts and reduce traffic around court complexes..."it has many cascading effects."However, he cautioned that virtual hearings cannot fully replace physical proceedings.“We cannot possibly have final or long hearings because original human voice is music to the ears and computer voice is not,” he remarked.Highlighting the digital divide in India, Justice Monga emphasised the need to integrate technological systems across the country. Citing Rajasthan as an example, he said litigants often travel long distances to attend court.“In Rajasthan, people travel up to 1200 kilometres to come to court because it is the largest state in the country. The video-conferencing facility therefore helps greatly,” he said.Responding to a question by moderator Senior Advocate Anand Chhibbar on whether virtual courts should remain a permanent feature, Justice Monga said the answer was clear.“For the benefit of lawyers, yes. It is there to stay. You don't have to be tech geeks, but you have to be tech-savvy. It is perform or perish. It is here to stay as a hybrid mode,” he said.Government Litigation and Virtual AdjudicationAddressing the issue of the government being the largest litigant, Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj said the phenomenon must be viewed in context.“The government, with its vast administrative setup, has its priorities. That is why they are not able to look at every dispute in time,” he said.He added that while the government remains the biggest litigant, it is also the country's largest employer.“Government being the biggest litigant should not be viewed negatively. It is also the biggest employer,” he observed, while acknowledging that some litigation could be avoided.Justice Bhardwaj noted that video conferencing could be particularly useful for administrative matters. "You can call officers through video conferencing. It is a handy tool,” he said.Rethinking 'Pendency' in CourtsOn the issue of judicial backlog, Justice Bhardwaj questioned the conventional understanding of “arrears”.“What do you mean by arrears? The figures you usually see in newspapers — but are they right for adjudication?” he asked.“Statistics record a case the moment it is filed. But does it become an arrear immediately? Is it mature for adjudication?” he added, noting that cases should only be classified as arrears once mandatory timelines have been crossed.Justice Bhardwaj also pointed to a downside of digital hearings, stating that technical glitches are sometimes used as excuses to avoid arguments.“As a judge, you are made to look into cases which are non-existent. That delays adjudication,” he remarked.Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Work, Tools Like LiveLaw Helps In Finding Better Law Points CasesJustice Harkesh Manuja spoke about the growing role of artificial intelligence in legal practice and adjudication, while stressing the need for caution.“My take on AI is that we should go ahead with it, but with a little bit of caution, it is going to help judiciary, but don't handover adjudicatory process to AI, he said. He noted that AI-based tools can help identify relevant legal precedents and assist judges in analysing legal issues more efficiently.“There are engines which can help find better law points like LiveLaw, SCC etc…” he said.Justice Manuja also highlighted the emergence of predictive legal technologies.“In AI, predictive analysis is also available. The government can use these tools to assess the probability of success in an appeal,” he said.Referring to emerging Indian tools, he cited systems that attempt to predict bail outcomes by analysing FIR details and...

Hybrid Hearings Are Here To Stay, AI Cannot Replace Human Adjudication : Judges At Chandigarh Panel Discussion

Aiman J. Chishti

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Aiman J. Chishti

Hybrid Hearings Are Here To Stay, AI Cannot Replace Human Adjudication : Judges At Chandigarh Panel Discussion

Aiman J. Chishti

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Aiman J. Chishti

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers