The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in almost all sectors of life has been on the rise during the past few years, wherein it is impacting as a game-changer for quite a few. While AI may have advantages in streamlining the processes and improving efficiency, there are certain areas where its application can be controversial. One such area is the role and scope of AI in evidence evaluation and in the judge-substituted decision-making process. The idea to use machines making decisions that affect our lives raises questions about impartiality, manipulation and lack of human judgement. In this article, after a flash introduction to AI, we will try to explore why using AI in the judicial system of Pakistan, in its present form and stage, is not only risky but also fraught with unintended ethical consequences, and why human intelligence be prioritized over technological advancements, particularly when it comes to delivering justice.
What is Artificial Intelligence?
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a term used to describe the ability of automated computer systems and the digital algorithms to perform the tasks that would typically require human intelligence. AI systems can learn from data and commands, and adapt their behavior, making them incredibly powerful tools for innumerable usages and applications.
There are different types of AI, including machine learning, deep learning, natural language processing, robotics, and host of other alike. Machine learning and deep learning algorithms will allow computers to recognize patterns in vast amounts of data and make predictions based on those patterns. Natural language processing enables computers to understand human language and respond accordingly, such as in empathy and informing manner. Robotics combine the hardware and software components to create the kinetic components that can perform tasks autonomously, a classic example are drones.
While AI has a lot of potential benefits and advantages for businesses and the individuals alike, it also poses significant risks when applied improperly or without sufficient oversight. In particular, the use of AI in the judicial system decision-making raises concerns about fairness, transparency, accountability, privacy, appeal and contest.
The Cons of using AI in the judicial system
The use of Artificial Intelligence in the judicial system has been a topic of discussion for quite some time. While there seem to be theoretical advantages of its integration to the existing judicial systems, there are also several known and unknown cons that cannot be ignored.
One major concern is the potential erosion of impartiality, clarity of thought, subjectivity and hence the chances to succeed in appeal owing to lack of these features. AI relies on data-driven algorithms which may not always take into account the nuances and subtle requirements of judgment in individual cases. This could lead to biased outcomes, where the innocents may be unduly convicted or acquitted or discriminated on account of inherent systemic and in-built attributes of the AI.
Another issue with AI is the possibility of manipulations. Hackers or theoretically even, the auto-operated AI hacking systems can alter the databases, code or reasoning of the judgements, leading to wrongful convictions or acquittals. Additionally, although technology can help to speed-up processes and improve the efficiency, it can never replace the subjective human judgement completely. Even more concerning is the clouding of human judgements by relying too heavily on the technology. Judges have long relied on their experience when making decisions but with AI taking over the decision-making processes, judges may become desensitized towards empathy and other emotional and humanistic factors that affect the verdicts, howsoever negligibly.
Summarily, while AI presents an opportunity for streamlining the legal proceedings and improving accuracy in certain aspects e.g., document reviewing; it should, however, be not used to replace the human judgement in totality, as this could have unintended consequences of affecting the life-changing decisions for many individuals and for the rightful entities involved in the judicial-legal matters.
The erosion of impartiality and subjectivity
AI may become increasingly used in the judicial system in some places to aid and support the judges in the clerical and manuscript work and handing down decisions. However, this may lead to debates as to whether or not AI should be used in the judicial decision-making processes where it may have a direct impact on people’s lives.
One of the major concerns about using AI in the judicial system is the erosion of impartiality and subjectivity. The use of algorithms can lead to biased decision-making, as they are only seen as neutral as the data fed into them. This means any biases inherent in the data will inherently be imbibed by the AI systems.
Moreover, there is also concern over who will be held responsible for any errors made by an AI system. This raises two very important questions. Would it be the companies that make AI systems responsible? Or the entities that want to use them in their haste? As machines do not have conscience like humans, it becomes difficult to hold anyone accountable when something goes wrong or leads to unintended damages. Another issue with using AI in the legal arena is that it may eliminate human discretion which, sometimes can result in more lenient or more stringent sentences based on unique circumstances ignoring the human factors. Without such discretion, those who fall outside of the typical scenarios could disproportionately suffer from punishments produced by the algorithmic systems.
Conclusively, AI cannot replace the vires of the human judgment completely because it lacks empathy towards individuals’ specific situations and the societal contexts which play a significant role during a case’s hearings and handing down the judgement.
Manipulations
AI has been touted as the future of many sectors of community living, including the judicial system. While AI can automate certain tasks and improve efficiency in information consumption and speeding-up the outcome, it is not without its drawbacks. One of the drawbacks is the potential for manipulations. With AI being programmed by the humans, there is always a risk that human bias could be introduced into the system. This means that people with certain characteristics or backgrounds may be unfairly targeted or treated differently in the court proceedings. Additionally, hackers could potentially manipulate AI algorithms to achieve their own goals.
Another concern with AI in the judicial system is that of transparency. The decisions made by an algorithm are often difficult to understand since they are based on complex mathematical calculations rather than human reasoning. This lack of transparency can make it challenging for the individuals to get unturned any unfair treatment they may have experienced in the appeal process.
In a nutshell, the litigant parties [plaintiffs and defendants] and lawyers might have apprehensions when interacting with an AI, whilst realizing the fragility of their cases in a manner which AI cannot handle. This coerciveness of the platform will then be subconsciously manipulating the faith of humans in such a system. There is also a danger that relying solely on the data-driven decision-making could result in important aspects of the case to be overlooked or ignored entirely. Human intuition and expertise cannot be replaced by machines in entirety. Therefore justice would only become more unjustified over the time if we allow this technology to take over our legal systems.
While AI has its advantages when used appropriately within a controlled environment where ethics and fairness come first before profits or speed optimizations — but implementing them blindly without addressing the concerns like manipulation risks will inevitably lead us down to dangerous paths jeopardizing what we value most around justice itself: the impartiality and the equality of rights under the law.
Clouding of human judgements
Another major potential concern of using AI in the judicial system is that it can cloud human judgements. AI algorithms are programmed to analyze vast amounts of data and identify patterns, which may lead to consequential repetitions and biased decisions. Clouding here means that a natural person can be misled by false information presented by AI as facts or reason in such a way that may cause a person unable to scrutinize or dispel it.
When humans make decisions, they take into account various factors such as context, facts, intention, motive, objective and intuition. However, AI lacks these human attributes and relies solely on data analysis. This means that important factors such as the mitigating circumstances or personal history may or may not be taken into consideration when a decision is made through AI. Furthermore, AI systems often learn from historical data sets that may contain biases or inaccuracies due to past discriminatory practices in the justice system. This can result in perpetuating the existing inequalities rather than correcting them.
Yet another issue is that AI systems are unable to explain how they arrive at a certain decision, making it difficult for judges and lawyers to understand why a particular verdict was handed down. This lack of transparency can undermine public trust in the judicial system.
While AI has certain potential benefits for streamlining and expediting the legal processes and reducing human error within the judicial system, its use must be approached with caution due to its potential impact on human judgement and overall transparency.
