Legal and Ethical Issues Related to the Use of Artificial Intelligence in the Field of Justice
Аннотация
The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) has created many opportunities in various areas of human life, such as facilitating healthcare and education, improving production processes and creating labour efficiencies, or enabling human connections through social media, to name a few. Even though AI technology can be of excellent service to humanity, it also risks embedding biases which result in discrimination and inequality, as well as violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms, which, not surprisingly, raise numerous legal and ethical concerns. Given these issues, this paper endeavours to provide some insights into the application of artificial intelligence in the judiciary and to answer some questions which might be posed in this context: Are AI algorithms capable of simulating judicial decision-making? Can legal and ethical standards characteristic of the judicial function be maintained when AI tools are employed in the field of justice? The main highlights of the paper refer to the shaping of the legal framework in the AI area, compliance with ethical guidelines and recommendations, and risks and biases created and embedded by AI algorithms, as well as the issue of transparency towards both parties and the public, and in the area of AI algorithmic reasoning and methods. The paper concludes with some examples of national case law from courts’ decisions on AI from five EU Member States, which provide specific case background for the issue in question.Библиографические ссылки
Aletras, N., Tsarapatsanis, D., Preoţiuc-Pietro, D., & Lampos, V. (2016). Predicting judicial decisions of the European Court of Human Rights: A Natural Language Processing perspective. PeerJ Computer Science, 2, e93. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.93
Angwin, J., Larson, J., Mattu, S., & Kirchner, L. (2016, 23 May). Machine bias. ProPublica. https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing
Cabrera, B. M., Luiz, L. E., Cavalcante, D. L., & Teixeira, J. P. (2024). History of technological evolution in the Brazilian judiciary system and the application of artificial intelligence. Procedia Computer Science, 239, 1188–1195.
Canadian Judicial Council. (2024, September). Guidelines for the use of artificial intelligence in Canadian courts. https://cjc-ccm.ca/sites/default/files/documents/2024/AI%20Guidelines%20-%20FINAL%20-%202024–09%20-%20EN.pdf
Conseil Constitutionnel (France). (2023, 17 May.) Décision no. 2023–850 DC du 17 mai 2023. https://perma.cc/8LC6-HW23
Council of Europe. (2024, 5 September). Council of Europe framework convention on artificial intelligence and human rights, democracy and the rule of law. https://rm.coe.int/1680afae3c
Council of the European Union. (2020, 9 June). Council conclusions on shaping Europe’s digital future. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52020XG0616(01)
Council of the European Union. (2020, 13 October). Council conclusions: ‘Access to justice – seizing the opportunities of digitalisation’. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52020XG1014(01)
Council of the European Union. (2023, 20 October). Council conclusions on digital empowerment to protect and enforce fundamental rights in the digital age. https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-14309–2023-INIT/en/pdf
Council of the European Union. (2024, 5 March). Conclusions on the application of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Promoting trust through effective legal protection and access to justice. https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-7127–2024-INIT/en/pdf
Council of the European Union. (2024, 16 December). Council conclusions (16933/24) on the use of artificial intelligence in the field of justice. https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-16933–2024-INIT/en/pdf
Courts and Tribunals Judiciary (UK). (2023, 12 December). Artificial intelligence (AI): Guidance for judicial office holders. https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/AI-Judicial-Guidance.pdf
Courts and Tribunals Judiciary (UK). (2025, 15 April). Artificial intelligence (AI): Judicial guidance. https://www.judiciary.uk/guidance-and-resources/artificial-intelligence-ai-judicial-guidance/
Courts of New Zealand. (2023, 7 December). Guidelines for use of generative artificial intelligence in courts and tribunals. https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/going-to-court/practice-directions/practice-guidelines/all-benches/guidelines-for-use-of-generative-artificial-intelligence-in-courts-and-tribunals
European Commission. (2025, 4 February). Commission publishes the guidelines on prohibited artificial intelligence (AI) practices, as defined by the AI Act. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/commission-publishes-guidelines-prohibited-artificial-intelligence-ai-practices-defined-ai-act
European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice. (2019, February). European ethical charter on the use of artificial intelligence in judicial systems and their environment. https://rm.coe.int/ethical-charter-en-for-publication-4-december-2018/16808f699c
European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2016, 27 April). Regulation (EU) 2016/679 on the Protection of Natural Persons with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data and on the Free Movement of Such Data, and Repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32016R0679
European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2024, 13 June). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 Laying Down Harmonised Rules on Artificial Intelligence. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=OJ:L_202401689
European Parliament. (2023, 19 October). Shaping the digital transformation: EU strategy explained. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20210414STO02010/shaping-the-digital-transformation-eu-strategy-explained
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2020, 14 December). Getting the future right: Artificial intelligence and fundamental rights. https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2020/artificial-intelligence-and-fundamental-rights
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2022.) Bias in algorithms: Artificial intelligence and discrimination. https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2022-bias-in-algorithms_en.pdf
FantasySCOTUS (n.d.). FantasySCOTUS. Retrieved 24 September 2025, from https://fantasyscotus.net/
Fine, A., Berthelot, E. R., & Marsh, S. (2025). Public perceptions of judges’ use of AI tools in courtroom decision-making: An examination of legitimacy, fairness, trust, and procedural justice. Behavioral Sciences, 15(4), 476. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15040476
Franguloiu, S. (2023). Principles for the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the judiciary as derived from the European Ethics Charter: Justice efficiency and limitations. Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Braşov, 16(65). https://doi.org/10.31926/but.ssl.2023.16.65.3.5
Grupo de Trabalho sobre Inteligência Artificial no Poder Judiciário (Brazil). (2024, 12 December). Resolution no. 332/2020 of the National Council of Justice (CNJ). https://www.cnj.jus.br/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/draft-ai-resolution.pdf
Guitton, C., Druta, V., Hinterleitner, M., Tamò-Larrieux, A., & Mayer, S. (2025). Adoption of artificial intelligence in the judiciary: A comparison of 28 advanced democracies. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 5(169). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163–025-00311-y
Heshmaty, A. (2022, 1 February). Use of AI in law firms to predict litigation outcomes. https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/blog/future-of-law/using-ai-to-predict-litigation-outcomes
Jadhav, E. B., Sankhla, M. S., & Kumar, R. (2020). Artificial intelligence: Advancing automation in forensic science & criminal investigation. Seybold Report, 15(8).
John, A. M., Aiswarya, M., & Panachakel, J. T. (2023). Ethical challenges of using artificial intelligence in judiciary in 2023. In IEEE International Conference on Metrology for eXtended Reality, Artificial Intelligence and Neural Engineering (MetroXRAINE) (pp. 723–728). IEEE.
Josten, W. (2023). Addressing bias in AI: Surveying the current regulatory and legislative landscape. Thomson Reuters Institute. https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en-us/posts/technology/ai-bias-report-duke-law/
Judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany of 16 February 2023. https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/EN/2023/02/rs20230216_1bvr154719en.html
Judgment of the Gerechtshof Amsterdam of 4 April 2023, no. 200.295.742/01. https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/details?id=ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2023:793&showbutton=true&keyword=ecli%253anl%253aghams%253a2023%253a793&idx=1
Judgment of the Verwaltungsgerichtshof of Austria of 21 December 2023. Ro 2021/04/0010–11 (DE). https://www.vwgh.gv.at/medien/mitteilungen/Ro_2021040010.pdf
Junta Electoral Central (Spain). (2025, 14 July). Ley Orgánica 5/1985, de 19 de junio, del Régimen Electoral General. https://www.juntaelectoralcentral.es/cs/jec/loreg/contenido
Kravetz, D. (2014, 14 July). Algorithm predicts US Supreme Court decisions 70% of time. ARSTechnica. https://arstechnica.com/science/2014/07/algorithm-predicts-us-supreme-court-decisions-70-of-time
Kuo, J. S. (2024). Wpływ sztucznej inteligencji na tajwańskie sądownictwo. Iustitia, 3(4), 148–150.
Larson, J., Mattu, S., Kirchner, L., & Angwin, J. (2016, 23 May). How we analyzed the COMPAS recidivism algorithm. ProPublica. https://www.propublica.org/article/how-we-analysed-the-compas-recidivism-algorithm
McCarthy, J., Minsky, M. L., Rochester, N., & Shannon, C. E. (2016). A proposal for the Dartmouth summer research project on artificial intelligence (31 August 1955). In Jerry Kaplan (Ed.), Artificial intelligence: What everyone needs to know (p.1). Oxford University Press.
McCown Jones, E. (2025). Navigating AI hallucinations in the US legal system: Challenges and solutions. Journal of Business and Behavioural Sciences, 37(1) pp. 90–99.
Moore, C., Ferguson, E., & Guerin, P. (2023, August). Pretrial risk assessment on the ground: Algorithms, judgments, meaning, and policy. MIT Case Studies in Social and Ethical Responsibilities of Computing. https://doi.org/10.21428/2c646de5.b016a7b3
Muller, C. (2020). The impact of AI on human rights, democracy and the rule of law. ALLAI. https://allai.nl/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/The-Impact-of-AI-on-Human-Rights-Democracy-and-the-Rule-of-Law-draft.pdf
Papp, D., Krausz, B., & Gyuranecz, F. Z. (2022). The AI is now in session: The impact of digitalisation on courts. https://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.ojs-doi-10_35467_cal_151833
Reiling, A. D. (2020). Courts and artificial intelligence. International Journal for Court Administration, 8. https://doi.org/10.36745/ijca.343
République Française. (2023, 19 May). Loi no. 2023–380 du 19 mai 2023 relative aux jeux Olympiques et Paralympiques de 2024 et portant diverses autres dispositions. https://perma.cc/PX93–4XMH
Senado de España. (2024, 19 February). Spanish Constitution. https://www.senado.es/web/conocersenado/normas/constitucion/detalleconstitucioncompleta/index.html?lang=en
Shi, J. (2022). Artificial intelligence, algorithms and sentencing in Chinese criminal justice: Problems and solutions. Criminal Law Forum, 33(2), 121–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10609–022-09437–5
Simmons, R. (2018). Big data, machine judges, and the legitimacy of the criminal justice system. UC Davis Law Review, 52, 1067–1118. https://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/sites/g/files/dgvnsk15026/files/media/documents/52–2_Simmons.pdf
Spanish Constitutional Court. (2019, 22 May). Sentencia 76/2019 (Official State Gazzete) number 151, of 25 June 2019. https://hj.tribunalconstitucional.es/en/Resolucion/Show/25942#complete_resolucion&completa
Stănilă, L. M. (2020). Artificial intelligence, criminal law and the criminal justice system: Memories about the future. Universul Juridic Publishing House.
UNESCO. (2021.) Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000380455
UNESCO. (2023). Global toolkit on AI and the rule of law for the judiciary. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000387331
UNESCO. (2024). Draft UNESCO guidelines for the use of AI systems in courts and tribunals. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000390781
UNESCO. (2024). UNESCO global judges’ initiative: Survey on the use of AI systems by judicial operators. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000389786
UNESCO. (n.d.) Artificial intelligence and the rule of law. Retrieved 24 September 2024, from https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/rule-law
United Nations General Assembly. (2024, 11 July). Resolution adopted by the Human Rights Council on 10 July 2024. https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/g24/120/36/pdf/g2412036.pdf
Watamura, E., Liu, Y., & Ioku, T. (2025). Judges versus artificial intelligence in juror decision-making in criminal trials: Evidence from two pre-registered experiments. PLoS ONE, 20(1), e0318486. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0318486
Yalcin, G., Themeli, E., Stamhuis, E., Philipsen, S., & Puntoni, S. (2023). Perceptions of justice by algorithms. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 31(2), 269–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506–022-09312-z
Yu, E. (2022, 12 December). China wants legal sector to be AI powered by 2025. ZDNET/innovation. https://www.zdnet.com/article/china-wants-legal-sector-to-be-ai-powered-by-2025/
