Judges aren’t princes but service providers: CJI at J20 Summit in Brazil

The CJI said a judge’s decision and the road leading up to it must be transparent, understandable to everyone with or without a legal education

Judges are neither princes nor sovereigns but service providers and enablers of rights-affirming societies, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud emphasised on Tuesday in his address at the J20 Summit (of heads of Supreme Courts and Constitutional Courts of G20 members) in Brazil’s Rio de Janeiro.

CJI Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud at the J20 Summit. (Sourced)

“We are now having conversations about the explainability of the Artificial Intelligence (AI) decision-making mechanism, which means that AI cannot decide in a black box and there must be an explanation of why it decided the way it did. As judges, we are neither princes nor sovereigns who are above the explainability requirement ourselves. We are service providers and enablers of rights-affirming societies,” he said.

The CJI said a judge’s decision and the road leading up to it must be transparent, understandable to everyone with or without a legal education, and broad enough for everyone to walk alongside.

Quoting a message from the Museum of Tomorrow (Rio de Janeiro), he said, “Curiosity, spirit, and imagination are essential to navigate the future of judicial systems.” He added this encapsulates the goal of the summit: to transform ideal judicial systems into reality.

CJI Chandrachud stressed that technology has fundamentally changed the relationship between the law and society. He cited two key areas where technology can enhance justice delivery—the streamlining of pre-decision processes and the implementation of post-decision measures to improve access and engagement.

The Indian judiciary’s journey with technology began in 2007 with the e-Courts project aimed at improving judicial efficiency and creating citizen-centric services.

CJI Chandrachud pointed out the success of the e-filing platform at the Supreme Court, with over 150,000 e-filings to date, and the significant cost savings and transparency achieved through the use of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) for case management.

The CJI spoke about the democratising effect of virtual hearings, which have facilitated access to the Supreme Court for many, including those with physical impairments and other challenges.

Over 750,000 cases have been heard via video conferencing, and important constitutional cases are live-streamed on YouTube.

Justice Chandrachud underlined the importance of timely uploading judgments to facilitate swift execution and further remedies. He referred to the interoperable criminal justice system (ICJS) in India, which enables seamless information transfer among police, courts, jails, and forensic laboratories.

Addressing the issue of disinformation, CJI Chandrachud praised Brazil’s programme to fight it and highlighted India’s efforts with the Supreme Court Vidhik Anuvaad Software (SUVAS), which has translated over 36,000 cases into 16 regional languages. He noted the availability of over 30,000 old judgments for free through Digital SCR (Supreme Court Records).

Acknowledging the challenges posed by the digital divide and representational asymmetry, CJI Chandrachud underscored that judicial efficiency should encompass a holistic process ensuring free and fair hearings.

“Our courts have come to be re-imagined not as imposing ‘empires’, but as democratic spaces of discourse. Covid-19 pushed the frontiers of our court systems, which were compelled to change overnight. Courts became more than just opaque physical spaces... When we speak of judicial efficiency, we must look beyond the efficiency of the judge and think of a holistic judicial process. Efficiency lies not only in outcomes but in these processes, which must ensure free and fair hearing,” he said.

The CJI highlighted the importance of addressing issues such as AI profiling, algorithmic bias, and misinformation, pointing out that the potential of technology lies in how it is utilised to minimise pre-existing inequalities.

“Inequalities are not neatly stacked compartments; they are rather a complex web of interwoven realities. Technology is not a one-stop panacea for all social inequalities. Complicated issues such as AI profiling and consequent stigmatisation of individuals in large language models, algorithmic bias, misinformation, exposure of sensitive information, and opacity of black box models in AI must be tackled with sustained deliberative efforts and engagement about the dangers,” he said.

CJI Chandrachud concluded by advocating for the establishment of normative guardrails in technology adoption to ensure that technological advancements support, rather than substitute, judicial decision-making.