The debate on the role of artificial intelligence in judicial decision-making must begin now, the master of the rolls said today. Addressing the annual Legal Geek networking event, Sir Geoffrey Vos said that, despite early scepticism, lawyers and the judiciary are now 'piling in' to find uses for the technology - which he stressed was simply a tool. 'Like a helicopter or a chainsaw, in the right hands can be jolly useful, in the wrong hands jolly dangerous.'
Vos told the audience of lawyers and lawtech entrepreneurs that, while it is clear that AI can be used in judicial decision-making, the ‘big question is what should it be used for?’.
’The answer is 'difficult and potentially troubling', the MR said. ’Nobody can tell me why it should not be used to assess, for example, the damages to be awarded in a personal injury case.' That would cut the time taken for a ruling from years to minutes, he added. 'So acknowledging that some decisions may be taken by AI, why should we balk at its use more widely?'
The MR gave three reasons: First, judicial decisions are the last resort in society; second, a machine will never be able to mimic human emotion, empathy and insight. Third, he said, is the risk that outputs will be based on the information available when systems were developed and incapable of human development. 'It might become difficult for humans to influence laws in the future.
'We need a serious debate now to consider what human rights people should have in the light of more capable AI,' he said. This should include whether AI decision-making meets the European Convention on Human Rights definition of an independent, impartial tribunal established by law. 'Some say yes, others say no,' he noted.
Meanwhile Sarah Sackman, courts minister spoke enthusiastically of the potential of law tech in economic growth and enabling access to justice. 'Technology has, perhaps paradoxically, the potential to humanise the law, making it faster and fairer to everyone,' she said.
However Sackman did not announce any further support for the Ministry of Justice-funded LawtechUK initiative, which is due to wind up next year.
12 Readers' comments