IN the ground-breaking judgement `Ishfaq Ahmed vs Mushtaq Ahmed`, announced recently, the Supreme Court of Pakistan has acknowledged the transformative potential of artificial intelligence (AI) in revolutionising the country`s judicial system. The ruling, authored by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, advocates a measured adoption of AI to tackle systemic inefficiencies, particularly the overwhelming backlog of cases in the district courts.

APs role in judicial transformation: The judgement highlights the urgent need to investigate the causes of delays in justice delivery, proposing AI as a tool for innovative solutions. By automating administrative tasks, streamlining legal research and identifying case patterns, AI can enhance operational efficiency and reduce the burden on judges. And rightly so, because of (a) the lack of legislation in expediting civil and criminal processes; (b) a dearth of human capacity of the existing judges to finalise judgements on time; (c) no assistance provided to the judges through dedicated judicial clerks in the subordinate courts; and (d) the constant build-up of pressure from civil society and advocates to finalise the cases.

Thisresultsinahugebacklogofcasesthat keeps on piling up, as well as poor quality of judgements which are set aside by the Supreme Court.

Balancing innovation with judicial principles: While endorsing APs advantages, the Supreme Court underscores that it should support, and not supplant, human judgement. The verdict mandates the National Judicial Committee, in partnership with the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan, to establish clear guidelines for APs ethical and constitutional use. These measures aim to preserve public confidence in the judiciary while integrating technology in a responsible manner.

The Supreme Court further stresses that fundamental rights must remain protected when adjudicating a matter, which is in line with American and British judgements. For instance, the American Bar Association`s Task Force on Law and Artificial Intelligence issued guidelines which emphasised that AI must be made part and parcel of routine court work, including legal research, administrative orders, managing court documents, etc.

However, these guidelines also state that since the excessive use of AI may lead to human oversight, or production of outputs that are incorrect or misleading, or plausible but not factual, the weaknesses of this system must not come in the way of delivering effective justice.

In this context, it is interesting to note`Loomis vs Wisconsin`,a case challenging the use of proprietary algorithms in sentencing, which raised concerns about due process. The defendant contested the application of the proprietary algorithm, COMPAS, in his sentencing by claiming that it infringed upon his due process rights because he was unable to dispute its legitimacy. The primary concern was the algorithm`s proprietary nature, which hindered Loomis from comprehending and contesting the way it evaluated his risk of re-offending. The Wisconsin supreme court upheld the use of COMPAS but imposed restrictions on its application, including the necessity for independent justification for sentences derived from the algorithm`s results.

A call for strategic adoption: The Supreme Court`s forward-looking approach sets a precedent for other government institutions to harness AI`s potential.

Thoughtful implementation could reduce bureaucratic delays and improve service delivery across sectors. However, without awell-structured and inclusive strategy, Pakistan risks falling behind in the global transition towards digital governance.

With Estonia pioneering a fully automated `robot judge` for small claim disputes; the UK adopting AI-driven tools forcase triaging and document analyses; Canada adopting chatbot `Amica` to assist with legal processes; China developing `smart courts` and the `Hangzhou Internet Court`; Singapore proposing `courts of the future`; the UAE integrating AI for case efficiency, translation and case filing in the Dubai International Financial Centre and Dubai courts; and India launching a `Supreme Court Portal for Assistance in Court Efficiency`, it is only a matter of time before the overwhelming increase of case filing in Pakistan will demand AI integration at all levels of the court hierarchy.

While this may be a far-fetched idea right now, the pace of technological leap and normalisation of use of AI vis-à-vis more human interactions will ensure that in time, provided we safeguard our judicial integrity, Pakistan, too, can enhance the efficiency and accessibility of justice and ensure the legal system evolves to reap the benefits of the digital age. • The wúter is a banister-at-law based in Karachi.