Artificial Intelligence vs. Judges

The idea of this article is that it serves as a trigger for the reader to wonder and wonder what they believe are the advantages and what possible conflicts that could bring the correspondence of the inclusion of this technology in the delicate task that judges have in the judicial processes in which a person's fortune, integrity and life may be at stake.

Long and tended in the legal framework on the influence and usefulness of artificial intelligence and the way human reality penetrated and, specifically, the legal reality as a possible tool that facilitates the long and complex judicial processes. And there was no different expectation between the legal community that uncertainty, by lawyers and judges, which with fear and uncertainties are encouraged to speak of what the technological revolution faces for the private exercise of the profession, and with much more protagonism in the judicial public sphere.

To start developing the theme and try to understand whether this technology can or not replace the critical analysis and the judge's contextualized thinking, it is appropriate to make an approximation to the concept of what is meant by artificial intelligence and how it operates.

In simple terms, artificial intelligence (AI) is a system that combines informatics and data to solve different problems and situations. Trying to imitate the human abilities of making decisions. The AI uses data to interpret and make decisions in various situations. These data are interpreted and ordered through the algorithms which are the ones that provide the proper instructions for the machine to analyze, interpret and order. The question we can ask now is

Can algorithms make decisions that are delegated to a judge in a court case?

Several opinions and postures arose to this questioning. On the one hand, experts understand that it could identify circumstantial factors that modify or affect the decision in the concrete case in some way, through the exhaustive analysis of cases and analogous jurisprudence where they can identify and use similar solutions to similar cases, i.e. through data analysis. But this possibility leads us to ask ourselves what is so safe? Is it always the exact reflex data of reality?

Let us imagine that we are in a European country where the majority of its prison population are people of Latin origin, who unfortunately exist, and suppose that, in the face of a concrete case, the algorithm should determine whether the person or is not guilty of the crime by which the accused. The algorithm will conduct an analysis of jurisprudence data from similar previous cases and will seek data to help you formulate a decision which it considers appropriate. Could it be said that the algorithm is highly likely to fall under a cognitive bias? What about gender bias? Could the data you find and analyze fully solve the particular case presented to you? Would that be fair?

Definitely, on more than one occasion we could meet under bias that make the decision unfair, because then it would not represent an advantage for the judicial system, at least not until the AI is able to overcome it.

Now, this and many other questions can be made around the use of artificial intelligence in areas as sensitive and complex as the decisions that day by day make the judges and that repercussions directly in the heritage or in the life of a person. Let us consider not only prejudices, but also data manipulation and specific specificities that each case presents. For the human conflicts that come to a judge's trial are often not as simple as they believe.

But in order not to put aside the enormous benefits of AI, it should be noted that it is a great tool for simplifying tasks and procedures not so complex and that positively repercussions on the speed and agility of processes. The slowness of justice and the need to fill transaction costs put AI as the key tool that the justice system needs and that should include in your organization late or early.

Argentina has already started using this type of technology in the judicial field, especially in tasks that represent tedious time losses and that the AI resolves in a matter of seconds. We are, without a doubt, faced with a great ally that does not come to replace, but complement, facilitate and expedite and that it is appropriate to know and explore its numerous utilities.