THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE JUDICIARY: THEORY AND PRACTICE
Keywords:
sunʼiy intellekt, bashorat-oldindan taxmin qilish, axloqiy tamoyillar, inson huquqlari hurmat qilinishi tamoyili, teng munosabatda bo‘lish tamoyili, maʼlumotlar xavfsizligini taʼminlash, sud hokimiyati organlari, raqamlashtirish, sunʼiy intellektni nazorat qilish, katta hajmdagi maʼlumotlar (big data)Abstract
In this article, the author analyzes the main functions of artificial intelligence in courts: such as organizing data, consulting, and forecasting. In addition, this article discusses the principles of applying artificial intelligence in judicial practice from a scientific point of view: such as ethical principles, the principle of respect for human rights, the principle of equality, the principle of data security, the principle of transparency, the principle of user control over artificial intelligence. Along with the above, the author thoroughly studied the effective use of artificial intelligence in the judicial system. In conclusion, the author puts proposals forward for further improvement of the use of artificial intelligence in courts that uniformity of court practice and transparency of court documents will be ensured. For citizens, artificial intelligence will become a quality tool for finding and evaluating the outcome of court proceedings using the latest advances in IT. This allows the plaintiff to predict the likelihood of the success of the application being sued and to make a decision on that basis without going to court.
References
1. McCarthy J. et al. A Proposal for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence, 1955, August 31. Ed. J. Kaplan. Artificial Intelligence: What Everyone Needs to Know, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016.
2. Julia L. L’intelligence artificielle n’existe pas (AI does not exist). First Edition, Paris, 2019, p. 123.
3. Kahnemann D. Thinking, fast and slow. London, Penguin, 2011, p. 43.
4. British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal, 2019. The Civil Resolution Tribunal. Available at: https://civilresolutionbc.ca/.
5. Van der Put M. Kan artificiële intelligentie de rechtspraak betoveren (Can AI bewitch the courts)? Rechtstreeks, 2019, February, pp. 50-60.
6. Aletras N., Tsarapatsanis D., Preoţiuc-Pietro D., Lampos V. Predicting judicial decisions of the European Court of Human Rights: a Natural Language Processing perspective. PeerJ Computer Science, 2016, 2:e93. DOI: 10.7717/peerj-cs.93/.
7. Prakken H. Komt de robotrechter eraan (Is the robot judge arriving?)? Nederlands Juristenblad, 2018, April, no. 207.
8. Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research World Prison Brief. Available at: www.prisonstudies.org/ (accessed 06.12.2019).
9. Angwin J. Machine Bias. ProPublica, 2016, May 23.
10. European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial systems and their environment. Strasbourg, Council of Europe, 2019.
11. Council of State advice of September 6 2018, Staatscourant. Official Gazette, 2018, 50999.
12. Contini F., Lanzara G.F. The elusive mediation between law and technology. P. Branco, N. Hosen, M. Leone and R. Mohr (eds), Tools of Meaning: Representation, Objects, and Agency in the Technologies of Law and Religion, I Saggi di Lexia, Aracne, Rome, 2017-2018, pp. 4-9.
13. Hildebrandt M. Position on artificial intelligence and the law’, Position paper for hearing/round table discussion on Artificial Intelligence in the administration of justice, on at the Second Chamber of Parliament of the Netherlands, 2018, March 29. Kamerstukken (Chamber documents) II 2018Z05199.
14. Van Opijnen M. Legal(ly) linked data. Computerrecht, 2018, February, no. 55.
15. Scherer M. Artificial Intelligence and Legal Decision-Making: The Wide Open? Study on the Ehample of International Arbitration, 2019, May 22. Queen Mary School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 318/2019. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3392669/.
