KOCHI– The Kerala High Court has unveiled a groundbreaking policy governing the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) by judges and their support staff. While embracing the potential of technology to streamline administrative tasks, the policy draws a firm line, unequivocally prohibiting AI from influencing judicial decisions, findings, or the drafting of judgments, underscoring the irreplaceable role of human intellect in the dispensation of justice.
A Pioneering Framework for Judicial AI Integration
This comprehensive framework aims to integrate AI tools responsibly into daily operations while safeguarding the core principles of judicial independence and human oversight. The directive applies to judges and their staff across the State’s district judiciary, setting a precedent for other legal systems considering the adoption of artificial intelligence.
A Brief Introduction about Prof. Triveni Singh, PhD | Ex-IPS | FCRF| FutureCrime Researcher
Upholding Human Discretion: AI’s Limits in Adjudication
At the heart of the new policy is a constant stance against the use of AI in any aspect of judicial decision-making. The guidelines explicitly state that AI tools are strictly forbidden for arriving at findings, determining reliefs, issuing orders, or crafting judgments. This prohibition reflects a deep commitment to preserving human judgment, legal reasoning, and the nuanced understanding required for equitable justice, ensuring that technological advancements do not erode the sanctity of human discretion in legal pronouncements.
Safeguarding Data and Ensuring Ethical Use
Beyond the clear demarcation of AI’s role, the Kerala High Court’s policy emphasizes stringent control over the types of AI tools permissible. It restricts the use of general cloud-based AI services, such as ChatGPT and Deepseek, in favor of only those AI tools specifically approved by the High Court or Supreme Court. This measure is designed to guarantee data confidentiality and security within the judicial system. Furthermore, the policy mandates meticulous human verification of all legal citations, references, and translations generated by AI, coupled with the requirement for human supervision even when AI is employed for routine administrative tasks like case scheduling.
Algoritha: The Most Trusted Name in BFSI Investigations and DFIR Services
Accountability, Training, and Continuous Oversight
The new policy also lays down a robust framework for accountability and continuous improvement. It necessitates the maintenance of detailed audit records for all AI tool usage, ensuring transparency and traceability. Crucially, judicial members and staff are mandated to undergo comprehensive training programs covering the ethical, legal, technical, and practical aspects of AI. The policy also includes a mechanism for promptly reporting any errors or issues encountered with approved AI tools, facilitating their review and necessary adjustments.
