Use Of AI In Court Adjudication Presents Both Opportunities & Challenges : CJI DY Chandrachud

Chief Justice of India, Dr DY Chandrachud in his welcome address at the Indo-Singapore Judicial Conference spotlighted the intervention of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the realm of legal practice and judicial decision-making. Stressing the need to embrace the technological developments and the onset of AI in the legal domain, the CJI also cautioned against 'high-risk' AI tools which may lead to unexplained bias and indirect discrimination when applying in the field of judicial adjudication. Turning to the key challenges posed by AI when used in the adjudication process, CJI highlighted how its integration into the legal domain raises ethical concerns and practical challenges."The integration of AI in modern processes including court proceedings raises complex ethical, legal, and practical considerations that demand a thorough examination. The use of AI in court adjudication presents both opportunities and challenges that warrant nuanced deliberation"The CJI further noted how the use of AI is no longer limited to administrative efficiency but has also seeped into legal research and judicial brainstorming. While several legal firms regardless of their size, are leveraging AI to enhance their research efforts, AI is increasingly being experimented with in judicial adjudication across the globe. This was illustrated through the instance of using ChatGPT (an AI chatbot) by a Judge in Columbia in 2023 to clarify questions of law in a casing concerning insurance claims for an autistic child. " In his groundbreaking decision, Justice Padilla incorporated a unique element into his judgment: a conversation with the ChatGPT bot. The court sought clarity on whether an autistic minor should be exempt from paying fees for their therapies by engaging in ChatGPT. Based on this exchange, he rendered a verdict affirming that, under Colombian law, an autistic child is indeed exempt from such fees." The Columbian judge also clarified that AI in no way replaces the judges for their independent and rational thinking. Recalling a similar incident in Indian Courts, the CJI mentioned how the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Jaswinder Singh v. State of Punjab relied upon ChatGPT to get a broader outlook of bail jurisprudence across the globe. "However, it is crucial to clarify that ChatGPT's input was not considered by the High Court when assessing the case's merits. Instead, it was intended to offer a broader understanding of bail jurisprudence, particularly in cases involving cruelty as a factor." Recalling how the outbreak of COVID-19 led to the adaptation of digital proceedings, the pandemic period was a rippling era of increased reliance on technology by the Courts. drawing parallels from the United Kingdom's 'Digital Case System', the CJI mentioned of Indian Court's usage of the Case Management System for efficient managing of cases from the filing stage up until the disposal.Lauding the creative usage of AI in the administration wing of the Justice delivery mechanism, CJI gave the example of the recent live transcription services introduced by the Supreme Court. The AI-based system, 'Supreme Court Vidhik Anuvaad Software' makes the legal proceedings and judgements easier to understand in 18 regional languages and Hindi, thus bridging the gap between the common man and the judiciary. On The Worries Of The AI Wonder: Addressing Concerns Of Bias & Discrimination Stressing on the flipped side of the coin, the CJI noted that several drawbacks also persist while making good of the AI. Mentioning how in one of the cases in the US, a lawyer submission AI generated bogus decisions in a legal document in an attempt to mislead the court. This, he highlighted was an example of "hallucinations" - the AI generating false narratives or misleading responses. Without robust auditing mechanisms in place, instances of “hallucinations” – where AI generates false or misleading responses – may occur, leading to improper advice and, in extreme cases, miscarriages of justice. A cautionary tale from the US serves as a stark reminder of the risks, where a New York lawyer submitted a legal brief containing fabricated judicial decisions. The element of bias is an important issue when it comes to dealing with AI. The CJI explained that AI systems may tend to mete out unfair treatment without the intention of doing so, thus bringing in an element of 'indirect discrimination'. To supplement this, he gave the example of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of DH&Ors v Czech Republic. In the said instance, the neutral tests evaluating the intellectual capability of children led to a disproportionate number of minority Roma children being sent to special schools due to cultural and linguistic differences from the tests. The CJI further analysed how such discrimination may occur- Firstly when it's learning from data that has mistakes or is incomplete. Secondly, when it makes decisions using secret methods, making the reasoning for such...

Use Of AI In Court Adjudication Presents Both Opportunities & Challenges : CJI DY Chandrachud

Anmol Kaur Bawa

Tags