The role of AI in the judiciary must be carefully regulated

Last Updated on March 11, 2025 by Shianjany Pradhan

Justice B.R. Gavai has emphasized caution when integrating AI into the judicial system. While he acknowledged that AI can be a valuable tool for streamlining administrative tasks—particularly in case management, scheduling, and listing—he also highlighted the risks of becoming overly reliant.

Speaking at a conference hosted by the Supreme Court of Kenya, Justice Gavai noted that AI-driven scheduling tools are already used in courts worldwide to allocate hearing dates efficiently, balancing judicial workload and optimizing court resources.

Many jurisdictions have adopted automated systems that assign cases based on a judge’s expertise and availability, making the process more efficient.

However, he raised concerns about the ethical implications of using AI for legal research. He pointed out that AI tools, such as ChatGPT, have been known to generate inaccurate legal citations and even fabricate case laws.

While AI can process and summarize vast amounts of legal information in seconds, it lacks the human ability to verify sources critically. This has led to instances where legal professionals, relying on AI-generated material, have unknowingly cited non-existent cases or misleading precedents—sometimes with serious professional consequences.

Justice Gavai also addressed the growing interest in using AI to predict judicial outcomes, a development that has sparked debate about the fundamental nature of justice. He questioned whether a machine—devoid of human emotions, ethical reasoning, and moral judgment—could ever truly understand the complexities of legal disputes.

He stressed that justice is not just about logic and precedent but also about empathy, ethical considerations, and the broader societal context—elements that AI, at least for now, cannot replicate.

Given these concerns, he urged the legal community to view AI as a supportive tool rather than a substitute for human judgment.

While technology can certainly enhance efficiency, its role in the judiciary must be carefully regulated to ensure that it strengthens, rather than undermines, the principles of justice.