NEW YORK - A UN expert* today provided a roadmap on how to navigate artificial intelligence's risks and benefits, examining how it impacts access to justice, equality before the courts, and judicial independence.
"AI is valuable only when it enhances human rights protections and improves justice in concrete ways. It should never be pursued as an end in itself," said Margaret Satterthwaite, the Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers.
"States and justice professionals should not allow 'techno-solutionism' to propel the adoption of systems carrying serious human rights risks and significant negative climate impacts," she said. "Human rights can only be protected if human beings - and particularly human judges - make decisions about the design and deployment of AI tools in justice systems."
In her report to the UN General Assembly, Satterthwaite noted that different risks arise based on the type of technology utilised, but that risks also depend on other factors, including the specific task AI is tasked to perform, and the manner in which technology has been developed, procured and deployed.
"AI may have great potential to improve access to justice, but people-centred approaches are required," the expert said. "Given the costs of developing and maintaining AI, design should be driven by users, reflecting their diverse needs. In view of the vast populations who remain excluded from digital solutions, States should always consider whether AI or traditional tools are best for ensuring access to justice."
The Special Rapporteur stressed that the right to an independent and impartial tribunal requires access to a human judge, and that the right to access counsel of one's choosing requires access to a human lawyer.
"The judicial branch must be responsible for the adoption of any innovation that might impact judges' decision making," Satterthwaite said. "To protect judicial independence, judges should be equipped with digital and AI literacy and the authority and opportunity to consult with technologists, lawyers and the public, about which AI systems, if any, to embrace."
