This is how the judiciary is dealing with AI’s shortcomings

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has impacted law and litigation conspicuously and globally. Only a good preparation will defend against AI-powered threats: Experts

AI-powered revenge porn, personality theft (face and audio cloning), identity theft, and phishing are modern-day crimes in a world facing the “AI revolution.” Just last month, Abhishek and Aishwarya Rai Bachchan filed separate lawsuits in the Delhi High Court to protect their personality rights, which were threatened by the misuse of their AI-generated images. In June, a sextortion gang that used AI and social media to blackmail vulnerable individuals was caught in Delhi.

AI has urged the judicial system to prepare to make changes accordingly (Representational Image)

In the US in May, a teen named “Elijah Heacock” died by suicide after being blackmailed with AI-generated nudes. Elijah was a victim of sextortion and was demanded to pay $3,000 to keep the fake nudes from being sent to friends and family. In the US, more than 100,000 reports filed with the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) this year involved generative AI. In India, cybercrimes saw a 31.2% increase compared to 2022, according to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB).

American senators like Ted Cruz (Republican, Texas) and Josh Hawley (Republican, Missouri) have proposed bills to prevent AI crimes, especially against minors. Sen. Cruz’s “Take It Down” Act — which requires platforms to remove non-consensual, AI-generated, and intimate images within 48 hours of a takedown notice — was signed by President Donald Trump in May.

But heedless use of AI has also irritated and dismayed courts of law both in India and the US. In May, judge Michael Wilner — in the Central District of California — penalised two law firms for the undisclosed use of AI after receiving a supplemental brief with “numerous false, inaccurate, and misleading legal citations and quotations.” AI tools like Google Gemini and Westlaw were involved. The penalty amounted to $31,000 for the law firms.

Recently, the Kerala high court issued guidelines for the use of AI in its district judiciary, emphasising that AI is only an assistive tool for efficiency and must not replace human judgment in decision-making. It also made it mandatory to maintain audit logs for instances of AI use and encouraged judicial officers and staff to get trained in AI. So, what’s the conclusive impact of AI on the Indian judiciary, and what does the future of law look like?

Our Laws Are Proper and Sufficient

“When it comes to AI & crime, we are not at a loss for laws, but we must increase our awareness and implementation capabilities,” professor Raman Mittal of Campus Law Centre in Delhi University said. “We must learn to understand our laws better and give due regard to technology. Similarly, we need to understand the nature of AI-generated works to decide their copyrightability.”

According to Mittal, law schools don’t even require new coursework for AI. “We do not necessarily require AI-specific courses to be taught as part of a law course; rather, there are many existing papers with which AI has an interface. For example, AI can be used to commit a crime, but we already know about the crime, and AI here is just a new tool to commit it. AI is a novel tool, and we must incorporate it in the laws and coursework through appropriate illustration and case studies,” he said.

“Courts and lawmakers may consider new AI-specific laws, but we can definitely sustain with the laws currently present. If new laws are created, they may be focused on increasing the penalty of malicious use of AI; for example, courts may be able to revoke the license of a legal practitioner who has used AI maliciously,” said an official from Delhi-based Markanda Associates, which have been providing legal services for more than 25 years in Delhi, Haryana, and Noida (Uttar Pradesh).

Ethics and Compassion Cannot Be Sacrificed

“Wherever matter comes to human emotions, compassion, or any subjectivity, AI’s version should be avoided. And AI’s usage must be minimal in courts,” Narinder Paul Kaushik, arbitrator in Delhi high court and former additional district judge (Delhi), said. “AI is a developing technology. Until it fully develops, using AI could cause a lot of uninvited trouble. Therefore, its usage must be minimal in courts,” he added.

And according to Mittal, “For academic and professional purposes in law, total and blind dependence on AI is not a good thing and hence should not be encouraged. Ethics should also be prioritized, and teachers, lawyers, and judges must be vigilant of its misuse — like fraud or cheating.”

Cross-Checking Should Be Done Religiously

“People may use AI as a tool as long as it’s not in violation of the law. For universities where originality is a requirement, AI-powered anti-cheat tools could help both the teachers and the researchers. For bar and bench also, cross-checking is of paramount importance,” Mittal said.

Kaushik corroborated and emphasised that judges will also have to be vigilant. “Judges and lawyers should be utmost careful when it comes to AI. They should cross-check everything they can. Especially judges will have to bear the burden and be very diligent until further developments happen in AI.”

Even in Law, Jobs Will Be Lost to AI

According to Markanda Associates, “Jobs will be lost to AI in the law sector, it’s inevitable. Lawyers can and do use AI, as long as a human reviewer is present before finalizing the work. This will eventually take the jobs of the paralegal staff.”