Artificial Intelligence can be used in the judicial process but cannot replace human discretion: CJI
NEW DELHI: The president of the Supreme Court of India, S A Bobde, stressed on Friday the need for (AI) in the judicial system, especially in cases of repetitive nature and document management, to accelerate the dispute resolution process.
However, he warned that AI cannot replace human discretion, which is necessary for fair decision making.
Speaking at the 79th Day of the Foundation of the Court of Appeal for Income Tax (ITAT), the President of the Supreme Court of India said that the use of technology in judicial operation is a fascinating area and a significant advance .
Although I have to clarify one thing: because we have been dealing with the introduction of artificial intelligence in court, I strongly believe, based on the experience of systems that have used artificial intelligence, which is only the repetitive area or decision making , such as tax rates, etc., or something that is invariably the same or that is, in a sense, mechanical, and that should be covered by artificial intelligence, he said.
AI can play an important role in courts such as ITAT in file management and decision making, he said and added that the artificial intelligence system we seek to use in the courts has read speeds of 1 million characters per second. I imagine a similar system can be used to read and extract all the relevant facts, calculate the tax effect and help in an infinite number of ways to boost the pace of decision making.
Bobde added that it is reassuring to discover that more nations are taking steps to experience and implement AI in their respective justice delivery systems.
This says that the judiciary is doing and must continue to do everything to face the workload in the judicial process, he said.
Artificial intelligence, as I see, brings new hope to boost public faith in our institutions. One of the most transparent measures to judge performance is its ability to resolve cases, he said.
He advised ITAT that the institution should continue with its legacy to follow best practices and the commitment to evolve as it has done over the years.
Citing the eminent jurist Nani Palkhivala, the president of the court said: Taxing and pleasing is not given to man; But taxing and being fair is.