Everywhere governments are debating the best way to regulate generative AI, or, in fact, whether it should be regulated at all. However, in some jurisdictions, AI systems are not simply a target for policy and regulation. They are law drafters and interpreters.
Such development raises questions but also Not only about automating employment in the fields of law and government, but also about the allocation of power and legal decisions between humans and machines.
First AI Method
In October 2023, Porto Alegre, the southernmost province of Brazil's capital, introduced the bill. Citizens will be exempt from paying new water meters in the event of a theft. It passed unanimously through the city council. Six days later, its chief sponsor, Ramiro Rosário, revealed that the bill had been fully drafted by ChatGpt. This sparked a fierce debate within the country. The role of AI in society.
Is technology democratizing justice and exacerbating inequality? There's never an answer
I'll talk to you Washington PostRosário explained that the bill was created in seconds rather than days rather than in the standard. It was meant to be partially argued – that citizens must be prepared for the future that drives AI. Other lawmakers have similarly taken symbolic measures. For example, Congress in Costa Rica used ChatGPT to draft laws relating to ChatGpt, and U.S. Sen. Ted Lieu introduced a congressional resolution drafted by AI to highlight concerns about technology.
However, some countries have more ambitions regarding the use of AI in legal processes. In April this year, the United Arab Emirates announced its plans Implement AI-driven legislative systemsis supervised by the “Regulatory Information Bureau.” The system uses AI tools to draft laws and review and amend existing laws. It also analyzes court decisions and application of laws and proposes revisions in real time.
AI Legal Control: Benefits and Pitfalls
AI has been causing upset in the legal world for some time, says Charlie Bromley-Griffiths, a senior lawyer at CONGA, a compliance automation company. In 2023, two AIS successfully negotiated a non-binding non-nondisclosure agreement without human involvement. “It was done in a few minutes, and the only human requirement was the final signature,” says Bromley Griffith. Since then, interest in technology has increased significantly among businesses and governments.
An approach like the UAE has “many, many, many, many benefits.” “It certainly lowers the cost of litigation. You can make the law faster. You can use AI to update the law more quickly, as the UAE intends to do.”
Legal systems reflect cultural values, political structure and risk tolerance. It's not easy
He adds that AI can be used to obtain more detailed data from law enforcement. For example, AI systems can find out whether the wrong people are being picked up in a wide range of law enforcement dragnets. The law may then be tweaked “just enough” to “confirm that it was applied to unconsciously non-injured offenders and unnecessarily punished offenders.”
When Francis first settled in the UK, the Gordon Brown government recently ordered that a suspected terrorist could be held for 40 days without trial. He says that machine-based systems may have helped prevent such torts. law.
In the midst of the mist and panic of war, legislators can easily go too far, Francis points out. Even if it is not used to directly draft laws, AI may be able to stabilize “travel directions for laws, regulations and policies.” AI systems can help the government “course corrections” through parliament or executive forces if normal legislative processes break down or become vulnerable in the face of an unusual situation.
Fine tweaks human laws
Like legal systems, AI systems are incomplete. Some critics argue that AI systems should not be trusted to draft laws and regulations because they are susceptible to errors, hallucinations and biases. Bruce Schneyer is a public engineer and author of upcoming books; Rewiring democracyinvestigates how technology and citizens interact. He argues that AI can help policy makers. Many of them are chronically underresourced and creating smarter and more effective laws. Importantly, it may help reduce the impact of lobbyists in the legislative process.
The law is usually intended to influence policies that favor them, either written by paid interns or based on model laws provided by lobbyists, Schneier explains. Both of these are defective processes. “It's just a flawed process,” he says. “There are positives and negatives. But it's hard to get worse because the lobbyist feedback loop is so disgusting.”
He adds: [using AI to draft policy] It means you can make the mistake of not realizing it, but that's also a drawback of a totally paid intern. ”
Various applications for AI: Customary and civil law
Francis says AI can also be used for arbitration and law, but applications may vary depending on the legal system you are using. Judges in common law jurisdictions such as the UK and the US rely on previous court decisions and legal precedents to interpret or evolve the law. In civil law jurisdictions such as the UAE, judges systematically apply statues written on the facts of the case, with a large emphasis on legal precedents.
AI systems may be most effective in civil law jurisdictions, Francis says. For easy training of the algorithm, stiff codified rules can be applied to legal cases. However, the common law system's arbitration requires a subtle legal interpretation that balances statues, practices and precedents.t. Here, AI systems may be struggling.
However, that is possible, and in Francis' view, it would be desirable for AI to be used in both types of legal systems. AI can speed up judgment in common law, especially in countries with “hardenable or regressed caseloads.” A machine-based approach could reduce unnecessarily long, long, process-rich arbitrages where potential judges bias could interfere with fair application of the law. “There's still some bias in AI,” he points out. “But you managed to eliminate bribery, favors, elections, and less subtle personal bias.”
AI and legal challenges
Despite techno-positive sentiment, the use of AI in legal processes can pose a major challenge to complex, global commercial landscapes. For example, it can cause headaches for lawmakers and lawyers.
Lobbyist feedback loops are very disgusting, they are difficult to get worse
“Imagine the AI used to approve a loan,” says Bromley Griffith. Thanks to bias, AI systems can reject applications from certain demographics. And while there may be regulations to prevent such discrimination, others do not.
General legal standards are needed to ensure fairness and ethical treatment across borders, he adds. But creating such a standard is complicated. While global consistency would be desirable, the law is essentially local. He explains what one country views as fairness, another may view it as excessive.
“The legal system reflects cultural values, political structure and risk tolerance, and it's not easy to harmonize all of these,” says Bromley Griffith. “However, we can strive for baseline principles of transparency, accountability and non-discrimination. While we don't get full uniformity, we can build a shared foundation that respects local nuances while protecting human dignity where AI uses it.”
The future of legal technology
Many legitimate startups already use AI tools to write briefs, test ju apprentices, test court arguments, hold mock trials, and provide feedback on delivery. Using technology well can be extremely beneficial. However, if it is applied badly, “technology becomes the person in charge.”
“Does AI make the average lawyer better? Does it increase access to justice? If so, it's great,” says Schneier. “Or does it make the best lawyer better? Does it divide the rich and poor further? It's coming back to power. Is technology democratizing justice or exacerbating inequality? There's no answer.”
As Rosário's Port Allegle experiment suggests, AI could be already used to create laws more than everyone knows. What's important now is the guardrails built around it to ensure that AI is increasing justice rather than eroding it.
Everywhere governments are debating the best way to regulate generative AI, or, in fact, whether it should be regulated at all. However, in some jurisdictions, AI systems are not simply a target for policy and regulation. They are law drafters and interpreters.
Such development raises questions but also Not only about automating employment in the fields of law and government, but also about the allocation of power and legal decisions between humans and machines.
