Can Artificial Intelligence Enhance Judicial System Without Compromising Ethics in India

 

 

The Indian legal system is grappling with an enormous backlog of unresolved cases due to a variety of factors, including a shortage of judges, state-by-state variations, the complexities of legal processes, and the system’s lack of transparency.

Based on the latest data, Indian courts are currently facing a backlog of over 60 million (6.1 crore) cases, encompassing both civil and criminal courts. This figure accounts for cases that are pending hearings as well as those awaiting final judgments. It is important to note that the backlog spans all levels of the judiciary, including district courts and high courts. The issue is longstanding, with numerous cases remaining unresolved for more than 30 years.

The backlog of court cases in India significantly impacts the country’s economy. It is estimated that the cost of pending cases could amount to as much as 1.5% of the GDP. Alternatively, a 2016 study suggested that judicial delays might cost India around 0.5% of its GDP annually. Given the size of India’s economy, these losses are substantial. To contextualize, a 1-2% increase in GDP could potentially be realized if judicial processes were expedited, leading to quicker court decisions. This would not only boost economic growth but also aid the poor by ensuring faster resolution of disputes.

As the number of unresolved cases continues to rise, there is an urgent need to explore innovative methods to accelerate dispute resolution processes. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has recently emerged as a promising approach that could transform various sectors, including the legal industry. AI technologies such as Machine Learning (ML), Predictive Analytics, and Natural Language Processing (NLP) are poised to significantly enhance the management and adjudication of legal disputes.

The most significant contribution of AI to the legal sector is its ability to rapidly process and analyze large volumes of legal documents. AI-powered tools can efficiently sift through statutes, case law, and legal precedents to retrieve pertinent and comprehensive information for judges and lawyers, surpassing the speed of traditional research methods. This capability is especially vital in complex cases that involve an extensive array of precedents and documentation.

AI can also assist in managing and reducing the backlog of pending cases by automating routine tasks and processes. Its applications can support case management, prioritization, and focus on cases involving women, senior citizens, and marginalized groups. AI has been instrumental in streamlining documentation and review processes, such as transcribing court proceedings. Beyond accelerating research, AI enhances precision by detecting patterns and correlations that might elude human analysis.

The potential advantages of AI for the Indian legal system,

 

 

The Indian legal system is experiencing a significant transformation with the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI). AI is addressing the critical issue of case backlogs and inefficiencies by automating routine tasks such as case management, scheduling, and legal research.

In India, initiatives like SUPACE (Supreme Court Portal for Assistance in Court’s Efficiency) are designed to yield exceptional results through a synergistic partnership between human and machine intelligence. SUPACE aids judges by providing relevant data and insights, thereby reducing their workload. Similarly, the Superior Court Vidhik Anuvaad Software excels in translating court records, thus eliminating language barriers within the legal system. These programs exemplify the potential of AI as a valuable asset for the Indian judiciary, improving the overall efficacy of the legal process.

Currently, AI-powered legal research tools are simplifying and accelerating the process for lawyers and legal scholars to find relevant statutes, case law, regulations, and other legal materials. These tools leverage natural language processing (NLP) algorithms to sift through vast amounts of legal data and deliver comprehensive search results. Examples of such platforms include Westlaw Edge, LexisNexis, and Casetext. Additionally, contract analysis technologies like Kira Systems, eBrevia, and Luminance offer automation capabilities, saving time and reducing the likelihood of human error.

Due diligence tools such as Legatics, Diligen, and Relativity Trace improve the accuracy and efficiency of the review process. These systems automatically analyze large document sets to identify relevant details, flag potential issues or risks, and generate summaries or visualizations of the findings. Predictive analytics tools like Lex Machina, Premonition, and Ravel Law utilize AI algorithms to assess historical case data and predict settlement amounts, judicial tendencies, and case outcomes, aiding lawyers in decision-making, risk evaluation, and strategic planning.

Moreover, generative AI technology is adept at swiftly parsing through extensive legal databases and case law, expediting the discovery of precedents and arguments. Cloud computing enhances this capability by enabling remote data storage and access, thus fostering better accessibility and collaboration among law firms.

 

 

The implementation of AI in Indian courts has yielded numerous success stories, showcasing the ways in which technology can enhance our legal system,

The Supreme Court of India’s introduction of the Supreme Court Portal for Assistance in Courts Efficiency (SUPACE) marked a significant step in the court’s adoption of artificial intelligence. SUPACE was developed to support the digitization of the legal system by providing a robust digital infrastructure.

Here are some examples where AI has been instrumental:

During the hearing of a political issue in Maharashtra, which involved a split within the Shiv Sena party, the Supreme Court employed an AI-based transcription system for the first time. This system, developed by the Bangalore-based startup Technology Enabled Resolution (TERES), was used to transcribe court arguments into text in real-time.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court reportedly utilized an AI tool, believed to be similar to ChatGPT, to assist in a bail case decision. This represents a significant move towards integrating AI more extensively in the resolution of cases and streamlining the legal process.

The Madras High Court demonstrated the tangible benefits of embracing technology by achieving higher case clearance rates in 2020 and 2021 compared to other high courts.

AI’s influence extends to tribunal operations as well, such as docket management and decision-making at the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). Similar impacts are anticipated across other judicial bodies.

Furthermore, AI facilitates remote representation, allowing lawyers from any part of the country to advocate for their clients before the Supreme Court, thereby reducing the need for costly and time-consuming travel to the capital.

 

Judges' Opinions on AI,

According to reports, there is a spectrum of opinions among Indian jurists regarding the application of artificial intelligence in the judiciary. Notably:

Chief Justice of India, D.Y. Chandrachud, has expressed optimism about the deployment of AI technologies in Indian courts. He believes that AI can significantly reduce case pendency and enhance the speed of judicial proceedings. However, he also maintains that while AI can operate autonomously and streamline processes, it cannot replace the nuanced judgment and expertise of human judges.

On Constitution Day, November 29, 2019, Chief Justice of India Sharad Arvind Bobde emphasized the potential of AI to eliminate tedious tasks that do not involve decision-making in court. At an event attended by President Ram Nath Kovind, Chief Justice Bobde suggested that AI could play a crucial role in simplifying judicial procedures and facilitating better public understanding through language translation capabilities.

Former Chief Justice L. Nageswara Rao, who previously led the Supreme Court's AI Committee, has advocated for the use of AI in administrative functions to speed up the delivery of justice. He has highlighted the need for AI to handle the non-adjudicatory aspects of the legal process.

 

Why are Indian courts still wary of using artificial intelligence (AI) in their operations?,

Some Indian judges harbor reservations about AI-generated decisions, fearing they may seem more just and accurate than they truly are. They argue that AI systems could mirror biases present in their training data, leading to prejudiced outcomes. Additionally, judges value their autonomy and discretion in decision-making, which they feel should remain uninfluenced by AI.

AI may not fully grasp or consider the intricate factors often involved in legal rulings. Moreover, the processes behind AI decision-making can be obscure, complicating the understanding of the logic behind its conclusions for courts and other parties involved. This obscurity raises concerns about accountability should an AI system err. Given the unique and complex nature of court cases, judges question the perceived precision of AI judgments and their reliability.

A pertinent example is the Manipur High Court, which, during a hearing last month, disclosed it had to “conduct additional research via Google and ChatGPT 3.5” to decide which case to proceed with. Owing to the government’s insufficient revelation of the service regulations for Village Defence Force (VDF) personnel, the court resorted to extra research using Google and ChatGPT 3.5. Ultimately, the court reversed the dismissal of a VDF employee, ruling that he was not afforded the opportunity to contest the allegations against him, as required by a directive from the Manipur Home Department. The court leveraged the information obtained through AI to reach an informed verdict.

This instance illustrates that the Manipur High Court’s reliance on additional research through AI tools highlights both the benefits and the limitations of AI in legal contexts, reinforcing the passage’s message about the need for careful and judicious use of AI in the judiciary.

 

Dark side of AI Integration in the Indian Legal System,

The integration of AI applications within the Indian legal system is not without its concerns. A New York Times article suggests that “Many legal tasks may be supplanted by new AI tools like ChatGPT, which can converse fluently and comprehend questions similarly to a human.” The piece further posits that as AI begins to supplant the work of lawyers and jurists, the legal profession faces a significant risk of obsolescence.

Moreover, the emergence of AI in legal decision-making has sparked fears about the potential consequences of an overreliance on technology and automation. Predictive analytics in the legal sector raises ethical questions, and the deployment of AI-driven decision-making systems entails considerable risks.

Nevertheless, the use of AI is accompanied by drawbacks and ethical dilemmas, particularly concerning the need for transparency and the potential biases inherent in AI systems. Ensuring fairness and impartiality in AI is imperative. Establishing rules and regulations for AI’s use is essential to ensure that it augments rather than replaces human judgment in the courtroom.

AI is adept at performing routine tasks, but roles requiring human discretion and judgment are at risk of being automated. Furthermore, if AI systems are not meticulously monitored, they risk perpetuating existing biases, as they are only as effective as the data on which they are trained. The application of AI in legal decision-making particularly raises issues of accountability and transparency.

The adoption of AI technology in Indian courts faces several significant hurdles:

Technological Resistance: The Indian legal system’s historical hesitancy to embrace new technologies stems from a lack of understanding, fear of change, or concerns over job security.

Ethical and Legal Concerns: The potential biases of AI and the need for transparency lead to ethical and legal quandaries. The “centaur’s dilemma” involves striking a balance between human oversight and AI to ensure fair and judicious outcomes.

Inequality: The adoption of AI might benefit those with access to advanced technology, potentially exacerbating inequality within the legal system. This could create a divide between those who can afford such technology and those who cannot.

Accountability: When AI is used for legal decision-making, it raises questions about who is accountable for the decisions made, especially if an AI system makes an erroneous judgment.

Data Privacy: The handling of sensitive data by AI raises issues regarding data privacy and the protection of confidential legal information.

Infrastructure: The absence of necessary infrastructure is a major barrier to the adoption of AI technologies. Effective deployment of AI tools in courts requires training for staff, as well as appropriate hardware and software.

Integration with Existing Systems: Careful planning and execution are needed to integrate AI with current legal frameworks and processes, avoiding any disruption in judicial services. Despite these challenges, the judiciary is actively seeking solutions to leverage AI’s potential to enhance the efficiency and accessibility of legal proceedings in India.

In conclusion, AI has the potential to significantly aid the Indian legal system by enhancing efficiency and reducing case backlogs. However, it cannot replace the expert and nuanced judgment of human professionals. Therefore, striking a balance between AI’s support and the preservation of legal jobs is essential. There is a concern that a lawyer might use AI to produce fictitious legal research with the intent to deceive the court. In such scenarios, it is imperative for legal professionals to adhere to ethical standards in using AI for legal research, ensuring that any AI-generated content is accurate, transparent, and utilized responsibly. Misusing AI in this manner undermines the justice system and compromises the integrity of the legal profession. The experience of the Manipur High Court echoes the wider apprehensions of the Indian judiciary regarding the maintenance of a balance between technological aid, judicial independence, and professional ethics.