Сomparative legal study of artificial intelligence positioning in judicial proceedings.

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The author studies the experience of using artificial intelligence in the framework of legal proceedings in the USA, China and Russia. This analysis includes not only an analysis of judicial practice, but also a study of strategic documents assigned at the government level of these countries. Goal of the research is to identify effective starting points for the implementation of AI in the judiciary, to determine the features of regulation of AI in the judicial process and specify prospects for determining the full autonomy of AI for judicial proceedings. The objectives of the study are to determine the main trends in the implementation of AI in the field of judicial process, highlight areas that can currently be algorithmically processed by AI, as well as determine future designs of the legal personality of AI, taking into account the opinion of the professional judicial community of Russia. The research methodology includes systemic, structural-functional, hermeneutic and comparative legal methods. The authors makes general conclusions about the prospects of AI for the judicial process and formulates optimal tracks for the use of AI in judicial cases, taking into account the comparative legal research conducted. Based on the comparative legal research carried out, the author formulated the increasing role of artificial intelligence technology used in the judicial process. The need to improve the legislative framework taking into account the technological specifics of AI and ensure an adequate level of information security when using this technology is noted. In addition, a starting point has been identified for the effective and safe implementation of AI as an autonomous participant in the process in relation to disputes that are considered in a simplified manner or contain a high proportion of data that is reliably verified and stored electronically.

References

  1. Морхат, П. М. Возможности, особенности и условия применения искусственного интеллекта в юридической практике / П. М. Морхат // Администратор суда. – 2018. – № – С. 8-12.
  2. Морхат П. М. Правосубъектность искусственного интеллекта в сфере права интеллектуальной собственности: гражданско-правовые проблемы. – 2018.
  3. Atabekov A. R. Modeling approaches to AI integration into public relations in Russia as per comparative research of foreign countries’ experience // Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Юридические науки. – 2023. – Т. 27. – №. – С. 686-699.
  4. Laptev V. A., Feyzrakhmanova D. R. Application of Artificial Intelligence in Justice: Current Trends and Future Prospects // Human-Centric Intelligent Systems. – 2024. – С. 1-12.
  5. OECD AI Policy observatory. URL: https://oecd.ai/en/ (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  6. Global toolkit on AI and the rule of law for the judiciary (UNESCO). URL: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000387331?posInSet=1&queryId=3601a156-e097-4d9d-afca-d5b42552353c (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  7. Full Translation: China's 'New Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Plan' (2017). URL: https://www.newamerica.org/cybersecurity-initiative/digichina/blog/full-translation-chinas-new-generation-artificial-intelligence-development-plan-2017/ (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  8. Stern R. E. et al. Automating fairness? Artificial intelligence in the Chinese courts // Colum. J. Transnat'l L. – 2020. – Т. 59. – С. 515.
  9. China Judgement Online. URL: wenshu.court.gov.cn (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  10. Chen B. M., Li Z. How will technology change the face of Chinese justice? // Colum. J. Asian L. – 2020. – Т. 34. – С. 1.
  11. Cui Y. Artificial intelligence and judicial modernization. – Singapore : Springer, 2020.
  12. Xin H. Judicial Reforms Under Xi Jinping. 2018. URL: https://usali.org/usali-perspectives-blog/judicial-reforms-under-xi-jinping#:~:text=Upon%20its%20completion%20in%202017,judges%20from%20210%2C000%20to%20120%2C000. (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  13. Wang Z. China's E-Justice Revolution // Judicature. – 2021. – Т. 105. – С. 36.
  14. Wang N. “Black Box Justice”: Robot Judges and AI-based Judgment Processes in China’s Court System // 2020 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS). – IEEE, 2020. – С. 58-65.
  15. China’s court AI reaches every corner of justice system, advising judges and streamlining punishment. URL: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3185140/chinas-court-ai-reaches-every-corner-justice-system-advising?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fzen.yandex.ru%2Fmedia%2Fid%2F625d5ed7094ea767c28a72a4%2F62d10c3e0b1c2c43e663a7fb (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  16. Судей в Китае обязали использовать искусственный интеллект. URL: https://legal.report/sudej-v-kitae-obyazali-ispolzovat-iskusstvennyj-intellekt/ (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  17. Wang N., Tian M. Y. ‘Intelligent Justice’: AI Implementations in China’s Legal Systems //Artificial Intelligence and Its Discontents: Critiques from the Social Sciences and Humanities. – Cham : Springer International Publishing, 2022. – С. 197-222.
  18. Connett I. France Resists Judicial AI Revolution //Above the law. – 2019. URL: https://abovethelaw.com/legal-innovation-center/2019/06/10/france-resists-judicial-ai-revolution/ (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  19. H.R.6216-National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Act of 2020. URL: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/6216 (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  20. Loomis v. Wisconsin, 881 N.W.2d 749 (Wis. 2016), cert. denied, 137 S.Ct. 2290 (2017). URL: https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/5914acb1add7b0493473ec15 (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  21. ERALD THOMAS MESCALL, Plaintiff, v. RENAISSANCE AT ANTIQUITY, et. al. Civil Action 3:23-CV-00332-RJC-SCR, 11-13-2023. URL: https://casetext.com/case/mescall-v-renaissance-at-antiquity (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  22. ROBERTO MATA, Plaintiff, v. AVIANCA, INC., Defendant. 22-cv-1461 (PKC), 06-22-2023. URL: https://casetext.com/case/mata-v-avianca-inc-2 (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  23. Williams v. City of Detroit, Michigan, A Municipal Corporation (2:21-cv-10827). URL: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/59815822/williamsv-city-of-detroit-michigan-a-municipal-corporation/ (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  24. Tice v. Amazon.com, Inc. №. 20-55432, 02-19-2021. URL: https://casetext.com/case/tice-v-amazoncom-inc (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  25. Wilcosky v. Amazon.com, Inc. No. 19-cv-05061, 2021-02-05. URL: https://casetext.com/case/wilcosky-v-amazoncom-inc (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  26. Состоялось совещание по вопросам расширения доступа граждан к правосудию с использованием цифровых технологий. URL: https://www.vsrf.ru/press_center/mass_media/30377/ (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  27. ИИ не сможет заменить судью в силу своего бездушия – Момотов. URL: https://rapsinews.ru/digital_law_news/20231026/309332787.html (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  28. Валерий Зорькин высказался против наделения искусственного интеллекта правосубъектностью. URL: https://www.advgazeta.ru/novosti/valeriy-zorkin-vyskazalsya-protiv-nadeleniya-iskusstvennogo-intellekta-pravosubektnostyu/ (дата обращения: 10.07.2024).
  29. Гаджиев Г. А., Войниканис Е. А. Может ли робот быть субъектом права? (поиск правовых форм для регулирования цифровой экономики) //Право. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. – 2018. – №. 4. – С. 24-48.
  30. Ястребов О. А., Аксенова М. А. Влияние искусственного интеллекта на административно-правовой режим противодействия легализации доходов, полученных преступным путем и финансированию терроризма: вопросы права // Правовая политика и правовая жизнь. – 2022. – №. 3. – С. 84-109.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).