Judge Br Gavai of the Supreme Court of India has urged caution when using artificial intelligence in judiciary. While acknowledging that AI could be a useful tool to reduce the administrative burden of case management, he noted that it can also be used to effectively list and schedul the cases. However, according to Livelaw, Judge Gavai warned of the inherent risks of overreliance on AI.
Also Read: Partner with Trilegal Partners and Lucio to Drive AI-Driven Transformation in Legal Services
Judicial AI
At a meeting hosted by the Supreme Court of Kenya, Judge Gabai reportedly emphasized that AI-driven scheduling tools will be integrated into the case management system, intelligently assigning court dates, balancing judge workloads and ensuring optimal use of court resources. However, he pointed to ethical concerns arising from the use of AI for legal research. There have been cases where platforms like ChatGPT have produced fake quotes and created legal facts.
Risk of incorrect information from AI-generated content
According to Judge Gavai, AI can process huge amounts of legal data and provide quick summary, but it does not have the ability to verify the source with human-level discrimination. As a result, lawyers and researchers who trust AI-generated information are unconsciously cited cases that are not or are not dependent on misleading legal precedents, leading to expert embarrassment and potential legal consequences, the report says.
Misuse by content creators
Judge Gabai also expressed concern about content creators who misuse live-streamed court hearings. He reportedly stated that short clips are often sensationalized and used to spread misinformation. He emphasized that such actions by content creators and YouTubers would raise questions about intellectual property rights and ownership of judicial proceedings. Therefore, he sought clear guidelines for the use of live-streamed court proceedings.
AI Citation Policy
According to a report by Bar and Bench, Judge Gavai stressed the importance of developing AI citation policies to prevent plagiarism of AI assists, ensuring law students and researchers maintain academic integrity and transparency.
Judge Gabai also warned of the future where legal experts rely solely on machine-generated analyses without verifying legal validity, the second report said.
Also Read: India’s AI sector could surpass 2.3 million jobs by 2027, Bain and the company say
AI as a supplement, not as an alternative
“AI tools should be considered supplements, not alternatives to human legal reasoning,” he reportedly added that he spoke at the University of Nairobi on the subject.
“If ChatGPT generates text based on a previously published article, does ChATGPT produce the same results without even citing it, or if multiple researchers use similar keywords?” he pointed out.
Also Read: Openai begins deep research: AI agents for detailed web analysis
Technology and Law
He reportedly repeated that while AI can help streamline the legal process, it lacked the nuanced judgment, ethical considerations and contextual understanding that human lawyers bring to the ground.
Judge Gavai further noted that cyber law, data protection regulations and intellectual property (IP) laws are key elements of legal education, addressing the growing legal challenges posed by technology.
Subscribe
