Artificial intelligence is transforming India's judiciary, promising efficiency in a system burdened with nearly five crore pending cases. However, without proper guardrails, it risks undermining the very foundation of justice. The Kerala High Court's recent guidelines on AI use in district judiciary mark a crucial step towards responsible AI adoption.
The integration of AI in the judiciary can bring about significant benefits, including increased efficiency, enhanced transparency, and improved access to justice. AI can assist in case listing, tracking, and prioritization, improving efficiency in overburdened courts. Additionally, AI chatbots and online portals can assist litigants in understanding procedures, filing cases, and accessing justice without middlemen.
However, the use of AI in courtrooms also raises several concerns. AI-based translation initiatives have mistranslated legal terminology, potentially altering the meaning of judgments. Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate fictitious phrases, leading to unreliable records and potential miscarriages of justice. Furthermore, AI search results may amplify user patterns, invisibilizing relevant precedents and impacting fair adjudication.
To mitigate these risks, it is essential to establish proper guardrails for AI use in courtrooms. Judges, lawyers, and staff need capacity-building to understand both the potential and limitations of AI. This includes training on AI tools, data analysis, and potential biases. Litigants should be informed if AI is used in research or judgment-writing, and they should have the right to opt out.
Reliable internet and hardware are prerequisites before full-scale deployment of AI tools. Courts must ensure that their infrastructure can support AI systems without disruptions. Independent monitoring systems and ethical review frameworks must be built into AI adoption to prevent biases and errors.
Ultimately, the goal of AI adoption in the judiciary should be to serve the ends of justice, not replace human reasoning. Dedicated specialists can close expertise gaps and guide comprehensive planning for AI adoption. Human judgment and empathy are essential in high-risk settings, ensuring that AI decisions are reviewed and validated.
By adopting a structured framework that balances innovation with accountability, India can ensure that AI strengthens the judiciary rather than weakens it. This will require a thoughtful and multi-faceted approach, taking into account the potential benefits and risks of AI adoption in the judiciary.
