AI Doesn't Have Qualities Of A Judge: CJI Surya Kant

The Chief Justice of India, Surya Kant, on Sunday, emphasised that Artificial Intelligence, despite its technological advancements, cannot replace human judges, as it lacks essential human qualities such as empathy, compassion, and accountability.

Delivering the inaugural address at the Union Internationale des Advocats (UIA) India Chapter seminar on “Artificial Intelligence – Prevention and Resolution of Disputes” held at the Karnataka Judicial Academy in Bengaluru, the CJI observed that adjudication is fundamentally an exercise of conscience rather than computation.

“The law is not merely a system of rules, it is a system of judgment. Judgment, in its truest sense, is not an exercise in computation. It is an exercise in conscience,” the CJI said, underscoring that courts routinely decide issues involving liberty, dignity, and the future of individuals, which cannot be reduced to data points or algorithms.

Highlighting the limitations of Artificial Intelligence in judicial decision-making, the CJI stated that while AI can analyse patterns and generate responses, it cannot understand human suffering or bear responsibility for its outcomes. He cautioned against any system where the final decision affecting life or liberty rests with a pre-programmed machine, noting that accountability remains a defining feature of judicial office.

"Every day, Courts are called upon to decide questions that simply cannot be reduced to data points. The liberty of an individual, the dignity of a citizen, the future of a child, and the fate of a family are too dear to human civilization to be relegated to algorithms.

They are not problems that lend themselves to optimisation. They require empathy, compassion, context, lived experience, and above all, a sense of moral responsibility.

And let us always remember that AI, for all its remarkable capabilities, does not possess these qualities. It may identify patterns, but it cannot understand suffering. It can generate an answer, but it cannot explain the human weight behind that answer. And most importantly, it cannot be held accountable in the way that a human judge can. That is why, for the times to come, I find it difficult to imagine a courtroom where the final decision on the life or liberty of a person rests with a pre-programmed machine."

At the same time, the CJI acknowledged the transformative potential of Artificial Intelligence in strengthening the justice delivery system. He noted that AI can enhance efficiency, improve access to justice, and help shift the system from a reactive model to a preventive one by identifying risks and anomalies at an early stage.

Referring to technological initiatives within the judiciary, the CJI highlighted that systems such as SUVAS are helping translate judicial decisions into regional languages, addressing language barriers that often hinder access to justice. He also referred to evolving tools designed to assist judges in identifying relevant legal materials from vast bodies of law, enabling more focused deliberation and efficient case management.

The CJI further observed that Artificial Intelligence is increasingly reshaping the landscape of dispute resolution, particularly in mediation and online dispute resolution mechanisms. AI-enabled tools, he said, can help identify common ground between parties, analyse negotiation patterns, and suggest structured settlement frameworks based on past outcomes, thereby making dispute resolution faster and more accessible.

However, he cautioned that these tools are not infallible and may occasionally produce inaccurate or non-existent information, making careful verification and human oversight indispensable. Stressing the need for responsible governance of technology, the CJI said the challenge before the legal system is no longer whether to adopt Artificial Intelligence, but how to regulate and integrate it in a manner that strengthens the system without compromising its core values.

He emphasised that the judiciary must not be a passive adopter of technology but an active architect of its use, by setting clear boundaries, ensuring transparency, and embedding safeguards that preserve the primacy of human decision-making.

Concluding his address, the CJI employed a metaphor to underline the enduring role of human judgment in the justice system. He said technology may transform the terrain through which the law operates, making processes more efficient and revealing new possibilities, but it cannot determine the direction of justice.

“In the life of the law, that compass has always been human judgment, guided by equity and compassion, tempered by experience, and anchored in the enduring values of justice,” the CJI said.