ABSTRACT
One of the most fascinating topics in this twenty-first century is how the brain works. Scientists are very excited to make any machine that has similar intelligence as a human being. Artificial Intelligence is a program or system inspired by the brain, like birds inspire aeroplanes. The bird proves the possibility of heavier than air flight, and the brain proves that an intelligent entity can learn from interacting with the world. This dissertation explores the uses of AI in the judiciary. AI greatly assists the paralegal sector, a million times faster than humans. So far, morality is concerned with interpreting a legal decision; this dissertation shall evaluate through jurisprudential theory whether the interpretation skill of AI can be used in the judiciary because morality is concerned with interpreting a legal decision. Current usage of AI and the role of jurisprudential theory can help determine whether AI can be the alternative to human judges and lawyers in the area of the judiciary in the future.
Introduction
Artificial intelligence (AI) is being developed day by day. In this modern era, machines are used in almost every work sector. Artificial intelligence is a field where a machine can learn like humans and produce the same results.[1]Algorithms run artificial intelligence. AI has been predicted to be implemented in the judiciary from previous decades. The Ministry of Justice of Estonia has already instructed to create a robotic judge to resolve disputes below EUR 7000.[2] COMPAS is an algorithm that helps deliver criminal sentences in some states in the USA by measuring probability. “Artificial intelligence (“Al”) is no longer a precursor to the future; it is already here in the mainstream.” Now, let us ask a few questions to ourselves: Why do we need AI in the judiciary? What are the flaws in the judiciary? Here, the word “judiciary” does not mean any particular country’s judiciary; rather, it indicates the overall judiciary of the world.
For example, the UK’s court and tribunal system is one of the oldest and was developed for over 1000 years.[3] However, it still has many flaws that can be noticed easily. The problems of the judiciary in England are “a concise number of people can access the financial aid for a legal case, people who need Exceptional Case Funding (ECF) are often deprived of such fund, public legal education and legal advice are not adequate and not interconnected to each other, fees of High Court and tribunals are the main obstacle for the people to pursue legal claims, usages of the backdated technology in the justice system.” [4] In other countries, such as Bangladesh, many cases are pending, and the number has increased after the outbreak of Covid-19.
Moreover, corruption and lack of transparency exist in these countries. Let us take these two countries’ judiciaries as an example of the overall judiciary of the world. In first to third-world countries, the right to access justice and legal advice is either too expensive or too time-consuming. The primary purpose of the judiciary is to ensure justice for the people. Nevertheless, because of the above-stated problems, citizens are often scared of court. Between 2013 and 2014, the number of filing single cases decreased by 67% in the UK. Therefore, the primary purpose of the judiciary is to ensure justice that is not being served to everyone. To answer the question, what role can AI play in promoting access to justice in the 21st century?
This paper will discuss the brief history of Artificial Intelligence and the applications of AI that can be used in the judiciary (AI and Law) that will link AI and Law with each other. Moreover, the Current Uses, Advantages of Al Adjudication, and Shortcomings of Human Adjudication, Smart Court of China are among the leading real-life examples today. This paper will finally present a general conclusion by answering the question based on arguments and findings. Finally, it will link the problems and recommend solutions.
[1]Tara Prasad Sapkota et al., Artificial Intelligence That Are Beneficial for Law, 17 US-China L. Rev. 217 (2020).
[2]Seda Fabian, Artificial Intelligence and the Law: Will Judges Run on Punch Cards, 16 Common L. Rev. 4 (2020).
[3]Structure of the courts & tribunal system, https://www.judiciary.uk/about-the-judiciary/the-justice-system/court-structure/ (last visited Sep 14, 2021).
[4]Access-to-Justice_final_web.pdf, https://www.fabians.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Access-to-Justice_final_web.pdf (last visited Sep 14, 2021).