Abstract
Artificial intelligence, as one of the most important human achievements in the twenty-first century, is expanding its dominance in the scientific, technical, industrial, and artistic fields, and is casting its shadow over various activities in these fields. The field of law, and especially the field of litigation and judgment, is also being influenced by this technology, with both hesitation and certainty. The present article aims to explain the challenges of using this new technology as a substitute for a court judge. It seems that this technology, despite all its achievements and the opportunities it can bring to the judicial system, faces serious challenges in matters such as legal reasoning, respect for impartiality, and public acceptance. This study, using a descriptive-analytical method, while explaining the shortcomings of this new technology in the field of justice, reveals the fact that artificial intelligence, with its current capabilities, cannot be considered a complete replacement for the judicial position and is better used as a tool in the service of judges, helping them to resolve disputes more quickly and accurately. These challenges are compounded in Iranian law, which is influenced by jurisprudential ideas regarding the qualifications of a judge and lags behind current practices in other legal systems in the use of new technologies such as artificial intelligence.
References
- Abuzari, M. (2021). Law and Artificial Intelligence. Mezan Publications, first edition 2021, https://tinyurl.com/49jyz38c
- Aletras, N., et al. (2016). Predicting judicial decisions of the European Court of Human Rights: A natural language processing perspective. PeerJ computer science, 2, e93.
- Ansari, B. et al. (2021). Book, Data Rights and Artificial Intelligence: Concepts and Challenges, University of Kurdistan Central Library Publisher. Fhttps://libapp.uok.ac.ir/site/catalogue/231326
- Brookes, T. & Mitchell, B. (2018). Automated correspondence not necessarily a 'decision' which can be relied on, https://www.ashurst.com/en/news-and insights/legal
- Ćapeta, T. (2017). Of Judges and Robots”, in: Challenges of Law in Life Reality , Edited by Marko Ileši č , Slovenia: University of Ljubljana.
- Capeta, T. (2017). Of judges and robots. Liber amicorum Marko Ilešič-Challenges of Law in Life Reality, Univerza v Ljubljani, Pravna fakulteta, Ljubljana, 129-142.
- Cardozo, B.N. (1921). The Nature of Judicial Process. Yale University press. Chesterman, S. (2020). Artificial intelligence and the limits of legal personality. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 69(4), 819-844.
- Condlin, R. J. (2017). Online Dispute Resolution: Stinky, Repugnant, or Drab? Faculty Scholarship. 1576. https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/fac_pubs/1576
- Crootof, R. (2019). Cyborg Justıce and the Risk of Technological–Legal Lock-in. Columbia law review, 119(7), 233-251.
- Cruz, S. E. (2018). Coding for cultural competency: expanding access to justice with technology. Tenn. L. Rev., 86, 347.
- Davis, J. P. (2018). Law without mind: AI, ethics, and jurisprudence. Cal. WL Rev., 55, 165.
- Dworkin, R. (1977). Taking Rights Seriously. Harvard University Press. Abhari, H. (2011) Civil Law Book (Civil Liability of Judges in Iranian Law). Eternal Forest Publications. https://tinyurl.com/2hvrf9s7
- Ebinç, S. (2024). The Transformation of Social Contract Theory: From Classical Natural Law Theory to the Individual of Liberalism. International Journal of Contemporary Economics and Administrative Sciences, 14 (1), 505-528.
- Hekmatnia, M. et al. (2019). civil Liability for damages caused by robots based on autonomous artificial intelligence. Islamic Law, 16(60), 231-258.
- Jafari, T. H. (2021). Demon in the Glass: In the Philosophy of Judicial Procedure. Negah Moasar Publications, https://www.majdpub.ir/Home/BDetails/10809
- Kirby, M. (1999). The future of courts—do they have one?. Journal of the Indian Law Institute, 41(3/4), 383-391.
- Michaels, A. C. (2019). Artificial intelligence, legal change, and separation of powers. U. Cin. L. Rev., 88, 1083.
- Niiler, E. (2019). Can AI be a fair judge in court? Estonia thinks so. Ars Technica.
- Pasquale, F., & Cashwell, G. (2018). Prediction, persuasion, and the jurisprudence of behaviourism. University of Toronto Law Journal, 68(supplement 1), 63-81.
- Perry, M. (2017). iDecide: administrative decision-making in the digital world. Australian Law Journal, 91(1), 29-34.
- Posner, R. A. (2006). The role of the judge in the twenty-first century. BUL rev., 86, 1049.
- Posner, R. A. (2010). How judges think. Harvard University Press.
- Prahl, A., & Van Swol, L. (2017). Understanding algorithm aversion: When is advice from automation discounted?. Journal of Forecasting, 36(6), 691-702.
- Re, R. M. & Solow-Niederman, A. (2019). Developing artificially intelligent justice. Stan. Tech. L. Rev., 22, 242.
- Sourdin, T. (2021). Judges, technology and artificial intelligence: The artificial judge. Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Sourdin, T., & Zariski, A. (Eds.). (2018). The responsive judge: international perspectives (Vol. 67). Springer.
- Sourdin, T. (2018). Judge v Robot?: Artificial intelligence and judicial decision-making. University of New South Wales Law Journal, The, 41(4), 1114-1133.
- Surden, H. (2019). Artificial intelligence and law: An overview. Georgia State University Law Review, 35(4).?.
- Taruffo, M. (1998). Judicial decisions and artificial intelligence. In Judicial Applications of Artificial Intelligence (pp. 207-220). Springer Netherlands.
- Volokh, E. (2019). Chief justice robots. Duke law journal, 68(6), 1135-1192.
- Blackstone, W. (1766). Commentaries on the Laws of England: Book the First (Vol. 1). Clarendon Press.
- Wu, T. (2019). Will artificial intelligence eat the law? The rise of hybrid social-ordering systems. Columbia Law Review, 119(7), 2001-2028.
- Yu, M. & Guondong, D. (2019). Why Are Chinese Courts Turning to AI?.https://thediplomat.com/2019/01/why-are-chinese- courts-turning-to-ai/
- Zalnieriute, M. et al. G. (2019). The rule of law and automation of government decision‐making. The Modern Law Review, 82(3), 425-455.
- Završnik, A. (2021). Algorithmic justice: Algorithms and big data in criminal justice settings. European Journal of criminology, 18(5), 623-642.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence, as one of the most important human achievements in the twenty-first century, is expanding its dominance in the scientific, technical, industrial, and artistic fields, and is casting its shadow over various activities in these fields. The field of law, and especially the field of litigation and judgment, is also being influenced by this technology, with both hesitation and certainty. The present article aims to explain the challenges of using this new technology as a substitute for a court judge. It seems that this technology, despite all its achievements and the opportunities it can bring to the judicial system, faces serious challenges in matters such as legal reasoning, respect for impartiality, and public acceptance. This study, using a descriptive-analytical method, while explaining the shortcomings of this new technology in the field of justice, reveals the fact that artificial intelligence, with its current capabilities, cannot be considered a complete replacement for the judicial position and is better used as a tool in the service of judges, helping them to resolve disputes more quickly and accurately. These challenges are compounded in Iranian law, which is influenced by jurisprudential ideas regarding the qualifications of a judge and lags behind current practices in other legal systems in the use of new technologies such as artificial intelligence.
References
- Abuzari, M. (2021). Law and Artificial Intelligence. Mezan Publications, first edition 2021, https://tinyurl.com/49jyz38c
- Aletras, N., et al. (2016). Predicting judicial decisions of the European Court of Human Rights: A natural language processing perspective. PeerJ computer science, 2, e93.
- Ansari, B. et al. (2021). Book, Data Rights and Artificial Intelligence: Concepts and Challenges, University of Kurdistan Central Library Publisher. Fhttps://libapp.uok.ac.ir/site/catalogue/231326
- Brookes, T. & Mitchell, B. (2018). Automated correspondence not necessarily a 'decision' which can be relied on, https://www.ashurst.com/en/news-and insights/legal
- Ćapeta, T. (2017). Of Judges and Robots”, in: Challenges of Law in Life Reality , Edited by Marko Ileši č , Slovenia: University of Ljubljana.
- Capeta, T. (2017). Of judges and robots. Liber amicorum Marko Ilešič-Challenges of Law in Life Reality, Univerza v Ljubljani, Pravna fakulteta, Ljubljana, 129-142.
- Cardozo, B.N. (1921). The Nature of Judicial Process. Yale University press. Chesterman, S. (2020). Artificial intelligence and the limits of legal personality. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 69(4), 819-844.
- Condlin, R. J. (2017). Online Dispute Resolution: Stinky, Repugnant, or Drab? Faculty Scholarship. 1576. https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/fac_pubs/1576
- Crootof, R. (2019). Cyborg Justıce and the Risk of Technological–Legal Lock-in. Columbia law review, 119(7), 233-251.
- Cruz, S. E. (2018). Coding for cultural competency: expanding access to justice with technology. Tenn. L. Rev., 86, 347.
- Davis, J. P. (2018). Law without mind: AI, ethics, and jurisprudence. Cal. WL Rev., 55, 165.
- Dworkin, R. (1977). Taking Rights Seriously. Harvard University Press. Abhari, H. (2011) Civil Law Book (Civil Liability of Judges in Iranian Law). Eternal Forest Publications. https://tinyurl.com/2hvrf9s7
- Ebinç, S. (2024). The Transformation of Social Contract Theory: From Classical Natural Law Theory to the Individual of Liberalism. International Journal of Contemporary Economics and Administrative Sciences, 14 (1), 505-528.
- Hekmatnia, M. et al. (2019). civil Liability for damages caused by robots based on autonomous artificial intelligence. Islamic Law, 16(60), 231-258.
- Jafari, T. H. (2021). Demon in the Glass: In the Philosophy of Judicial Procedure. Negah Moasar Publications, https://www.majdpub.ir/Home/BDetails/10809
- Kirby, M. (1999). The future of courts—do they have one?. Journal of the Indian Law Institute, 41(3/4), 383-391.
- Michaels, A. C. (2019). Artificial intelligence, legal change, and separation of powers. U. Cin. L. Rev., 88, 1083.
- Niiler, E. (2019). Can AI be a fair judge in court? Estonia thinks so. Ars Technica.
- Pasquale, F., & Cashwell, G. (2018). Prediction, persuasion, and the jurisprudence of behaviourism. University of Toronto Law Journal, 68(supplement 1), 63-81.
- Perry, M. (2017). iDecide: administrative decision-making in the digital world. Australian Law Journal, 91(1), 29-34.
- Posner, R. A. (2006). The role of the judge in the twenty-first century. BUL rev., 86, 1049.
- Posner, R. A. (2010). How judges think. Harvard University Press.
- Prahl, A., & Van Swol, L. (2017). Understanding algorithm aversion: When is advice from automation discounted?. Journal of Forecasting, 36(6), 691-702.
- Re, R. M. & Solow-Niederman, A. (2019). Developing artificially intelligent justice. Stan. Tech. L. Rev., 22, 242.
- Sourdin, T. (2021). Judges, technology and artificial intelligence: The artificial judge. Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Sourdin, T., & Zariski, A. (Eds.). (2018). The responsive judge: international perspectives (Vol. 67). Springer.
- Sourdin, T. (2018). Judge v Robot?: Artificial intelligence and judicial decision-making. University of New South Wales Law Journal, The, 41(4), 1114-1133.
- Surden, H. (2019). Artificial intelligence and law: An overview. Georgia State University Law Review, 35(4).?.
- Taruffo, M. (1998). Judicial decisions and artificial intelligence. In Judicial Applications of Artificial Intelligence (pp. 207-220). Springer Netherlands.
- Volokh, E. (2019). Chief justice robots. Duke law journal, 68(6), 1135-1192.
- Blackstone, W. (1766). Commentaries on the Laws of England: Book the First (Vol. 1). Clarendon Press.
- Wu, T. (2019). Will artificial intelligence eat the law? The rise of hybrid social-ordering systems. Columbia Law Review, 119(7), 2001-2028.
- Yu, M. & Guondong, D. (2019). Why Are Chinese Courts Turning to AI?.https://thediplomat.com/2019/01/why-are-chinese- courts-turning-to-ai/
- Zalnieriute, M. et al. G. (2019). The rule of law and automation of government decision‐making. The Modern Law Review, 82(3), 425-455.
- Završnik, A. (2021). Algorithmic justice: Algorithms and big data in criminal justice settings. European Journal of criminology, 18(5), 623-642.
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Information Modelling, Management and Ontologies |
| Journal Section | Articles |
| Authors | |
| Early Pub Date | February 19, 2025 |
| Publication Date | |
| Submission Date | November 11, 2024 |
| Acceptance Date | February 13, 2025 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2025 Volume: 12 Issue: 1 |
По всем вопросам приема статей и выпуска очередных номеров обращаться в редакцию соответствующего журнала