Nikita Rai, Galgotias University
ABSTRACT
Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the judiciary is an application through which natural language processing, predictive analytics, and machine learning algorithms are employed to support the courts in conflict resolution, sentencing, case management, and legal research. While AI can improve the efficiency and predictability of the courts, the incorporation of AI into the law is replete with substantive ethical and legal concerns. The tension between maximizing the use of AI potential and safeguarding justice norms of fairness, and accountability becomes a ubiquitous force in modern legal thought.
One of the most frightening concerns of AI in the courtroom is discrimination and bias. AI that has been trained in past legal history can learn institutional biases and therefore could result in discriminatory sentencing or prejudiced judgments. Furthermore, the openness of AI-delivered judgments is usually of concern, with sophisticated algorithms being "black boxes" in which it is difficult for legal professionals and parties to view how a determination has been made. This shortfall in openness imperils core beliefs of law, including due procedure and the ability for a just trial.
The use of AI jurisprudence in judicial decision-making differs across countries. The European Union is leading the AI Act for high-risk uses of AI, including judicial. Other countries, like the United States, are behind in establishing comprehensive regimes of control. Issues of accountability, privacy, and human agency remain to be resolved.
This article presents the legal and ethical consequences of AI application to judicial judgments in case studies and regulation summaries. This article discusses a model based on the priority of reducing bias, transparency, accountability, and protection by law for making AI a facilitator of justice and not a writer of the uncertainty of the law. Legal frameworks can best harness AI power by introducing balance and instilling basic rights and ethical elements.
Keywords: AI, Judicial Decision, Technology, Privacy
Comments