Judges want to use artificial intelligence in courts

Judges want to introduce artificial intelligence into the courts, turning it “at the first stage” into an “electronic judicial assistant”, which helps, for example, issue sentences, but cannot do it autonomously, according to the reform. justice proposal.

This proposal is part of a summary of a report on the Justice Reform Program, prepared at the request of the Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugal (ASJP) by an analytical group composed of figures from the sector and coordinated by an adviser to the judge. Court of Accounts Nuno Coelho, who put forward over 200 sector reform proposals that, according to the working group, should be translated into “regime agreements” because “the most relevant or significant of them are based on a vision of continuity or a long term for which the calendar the legislature cannot give an answer.”

The authors of the document state that there is “particular interest in the discussion about the conditions or limits of artificial intelligence interference in the judicial decision-making process”, but confirm the need for regulated use of artificial intelligence (AI) and “deep reflection” on “limitations and applicable rules”.

As part of the “digital transition of procedural activities in courts”, the report proposes “to use AI in the first stage as a kind of electronic judicial assistant, for example, to prepare and assist the judge in drafting final decisions, to recognize the type of arguments used by the parties (“mineral analysis of arguments “”), or analyze complex data (“data mining”)”.

It also aims to clarify the impact of AI on the final decision, so that it can be questioned by the parties to the process and, if necessary, challenged in court to ensure that “harmful applications” are not allowed, such as predicting the practice of professional judges.

The paper also draws red lines in this field: “An obstacle to the creation of specific algorithms for resolving court cases without human involvement on the part of the judge or making predictions about the future behavior of offenders (for greater validity in criminal proceedings), which can, with great care, this application should be started AI in simpler civil cases, ultimately subject to filing a complaint with a “physical” judge.”

Within the framework of the rule of law and fundamental rights, the working group recommends that consideration be given to the intervention of all sovereign bodies in the appointment of judges of the Constitutional Court, extending the appointment or appointment to the President of the Republic and to the highest judicial councils. He also proposes to expand the possibility of appeal to higher courts when it comes to human rights.

At the level of cooperation and international law, a closer interconnection between computer systems is proposed that facilitates the exchange of information and international cooperation in the judiciary, as well as the importance of cooperation between the judiciary and individuals “necessary to obtain digital evidence” and “confiscation of virtual assets”.

“Legal mechanisms should be introduced to limit the encryption of messages and data to ensure exclusive access to them by persons legally authorized for this purpose,” the working group also defends.

With regard to the reporting of the judiciary, the document points to the presentation of annual reports by the Supreme Councils to the Assembly of the Republic, as well as to the Commissioner, and insists on the need for the budgetary autonomy of the courts, “according to” the regime. with the Department of Justice, with the justice programming law, given that the judiciary “must have a decisive or mandatory intervention in the decision to allocate the resources necessary for its mission.”

The working group also advocates the publication of court decisions, as a rule, and a closer connection with the media, with the appointment of a judge in each court as a link with journalists. Decisions of arbitral tribunals must be made public and establish “objective and unambiguous legal requirements guaranteeing the necessary standards of impartiality and independence of arbitrators in all arbitration systems.”

With regard to the hiring of judges, it is argued that “they must be qualified, without neglecting the evaluation of personal factors, ability to solve problems, resilience in situations of tension or social impact, in addition to the characteristics of personal empathy and leadership.” , urging the sector to “promote a new model that selects the most capable, removes misplaced academicism, and focuses on learning needs more than replicating university learning.”