К ВОПРОСУ О ПРАВОСУБЪЕКТНОСТИ ИСКУССТВЕННОГО ИНТЕЛЛЕКТА В УГОЛОВНОМ СУДОПРОИЗВОДСТВЕ

Abstract: This paper examines the potential role of artificial intelligence in addressing the critical issue of case backlogs plaguing the Indian judiciary. The integration of artificial intelligence within the Indian judiciary presents a transformative potential for enhancing efficiency, accessibility, and consistency in legal processes, yet it also raises complex ethical, technical, and institutional challenges. This paper systematically analyses the prospective applications of artificial intelligence in the judicial system, including case management, legal research, predictive analytics, automated drafting of judgments, and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. Artificial intelligence-powered tools can significantly reduce the backlog of cases, which currently plagues the Indian courts, by streamlining procedural workflows, assisting judges in identifying precedents, and providing data-driven insights for case outcomes, thereby facilitating informed and timely decision-making. Moreover, artificial intelligence can democratize access to legal information for the public and lower-income litigants, offering real-time guidance on legal procedures and potential remedies, which aligns with the constitutional mandate of equal justice. However, the deployment of Artificial intelligence in judicial processes faces multifaceted challenges. Key concerns include algorithmic bias, transparency, accountability, and the interpretative nature of law, which often requires nuanced human judgment that Artificial intelligence may not fully replicate. Data privacy and security issues are particularly critical in the Indian context, where sensitive personal and institutional information must be safeguarded against misuse. Institutional resistance, inadequate digital infrastructure, and the lack of specialized training for judicial officers and legal professionals further complicate Artificial intelligence adoption. Additionally, the regulatory and ethical frameworks governing Artificial intelligence in legal contexts remain nascent, necessitating the development of robust guidelines to ensure that Artificial intelligence complements rather than compromises judicial independence and the rule of law. This study also explores international experiences with Artificial intelligence -assisted judicial processes, drawing lessons from jurisdictions such as Singapore, the United States, and the European Union, to assess the feasibility, risks, and best practices for India. By adopting a structured methodology that combines doctrinal legal analysis, technological evaluation, and empirical assessment, the paper identifies strategic pathways for integrating Artificial intelligence in the judiciary while mitigating associated risks. The findings underscore that while Artificial intelligence has the potential to revolutionize judicial efficiency, it cannot substitute the discretionary, interpretative, and ethical responsibilities inherent in judicial decision-making. Therefore, a phased, carefully regulated, and human-centric approach is recommended, wherein Artificial intelligence functions as an augmentative tool to assist judges, lawyers, and administrative staff without undermining procedural fairness or legal accountability. Overall, this study contributes to the scholarly discourse on technology-enabled justice in India, highlighting the dual imperative of leveraging Artificial intelligence for efficiency gains while safeguarding the foundational principles of transparency, equity, and the rule of law, and offers policy recommendations, implementation strategies, and frameworks for continuous monitoring and evaluation of AI interventions in the Indian judicial system.

BackgroundThis study explored dental students’ and dentists’ perceptions and attitudes toward artificial intelligence (AI) and analyzed differences according to professional seniority.MethodsIn September to November 2022, online surveys using Google Forms were conducted at 2 dental colleges and on 2 dental websites. The questionnaire consisted of general information (8 or 10 items) and participants’ perceptions, confidence, predictions, and perceived future prospects regarding AI (17 items). A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed on 4 questions representing perceptions and attitudes toward AI to identify highly influential factors according to position, age, sex, residence, and self-reported knowledge level about AI of respondents. Participants were reclassified into 2 subgroups based on students’ years in school and 4 subgroups based on dentists’ years of experience. The chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test was used to determine differences between dental students and dentists and between subgroups for all 17 questions.ResultsThe study included 120 dental students and 96 dentists. Participants with high level of AI knowledge were more likely to be interested in AI compared to those with moderate or low level (adjusted OR 24.345, p < 0.001). Most dental students (60.8%) and dentists (67.7%) predicted that dental AI would complement human limitations. Dental students responded that they would actively use AI in almost all cases (40.8%), while dentists responded that they would use AI only when necessary (44.8%). Dentists with 11–20 years of experience were the most likely to disagree that AI could outperform skilled dentists (50.0%), and respondents with longer careers had higher response rates regarding the need for AI education in schools.ConclusionsKnowledge level about AI emerged as the factor influencing perceptions and attitudes toward AI, with both dental students and dentists showing similar views on recognizing the potential of AI as an auxiliary tool. However, students’ and dentists’ willingness to use AI differed. Although dentists differed in their confidence in the abilities of AI, all dentists recognized the need for education on AI. AI adoption is becoming a reality in dentistry, which requires proper awareness, proper use, and comprehensive AI education.

The aim of the work is to provide an overview of the potential application of artificial intelligence in forensic medicine and related sciences, and to identify concerns related to providing medico-legal opinions and legal liability in cases in which possible harm in terms of diagnosis and/or treatment is likely to occur when using an advanced system of computer-based information processing and analysis. The material for the study comprised scientific literature related to the issue of artificial intelligence in forensic medicine and related sciences. For this purpose, Google Scholar, PubMed and ScienceDirect databases were searched. To identify useful articles, such terms as "artificial intelligence," "deep learning," "machine learning," "forensic medicine," "legal medicine," "forensic pathology" and "medicine" were used. In some cases, articles were identified based on the semantic proximity of the introduced terms. Dynamic development of the computing power and the ability of artificial intelligence to analyze vast data volumes made it possible to transfer artificial intelligence methods to forensic medicine and related sciences. Artificial intelligence has numerous applications in forensic medicine and related sciences and can be helpful in thanatology, forensic traumatology, post-mortem identification examinations, as well as post-mortem microscopic and toxicological diagnostics. Analyzing the legal and medico-legal aspects, artificial intelligence in medicine should be treated as an auxiliary tool, whereas the final diagnostic and therapeutic decisions and the extent to which they are implemented should be the responsibility of humans.

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the realm of law has become a significant focus in the evolution of legal technology. The optimization of AI in the utilization of legal references aims to enhance efficiency and accuracy in legal research and analysis processes. This research endeavors to examine how AI can be optimized for managing and leveraging available legal references. This study employs an interdisciplinary approach involving computer science, law, and information science. We will evaluate natural language processing and machine learning techniques that can be employed to recognize, categorize, and organize legal references. Furthermore, legal and ethical aspects concerning the use of AI in a legal context, including data privacy and security issues, will be considered. The outcomes of this research are expected to provide practical guidelines for legal professionals, researchers, and technology developers to harness AI optimally in utilizing legal references. By utilizing AI, it is anticipated that legal research processes can become faster, more accurate, and efficient, thereby supporting a fairer and more sustainable legal system in the future.

The article is a continuation of the author’s series of articles devoted to the prospects of using artificial intelligence in legal proceedings. The paper substantiates the need for the formation of principles-priorities of justice using artificial intelligence systems as a basis for the protection of human rights and the formation of a new ethics of justice. Based on the study of the experience of the People’s Republic of China, it is concluded that such principles form a protective mechanism that will make it possible to protect participants in legal proceedings when considering cases using artificial intelligence systems.

Introduction. The judicial system in today's world is faced with a large number of cases that require efficient and fair resolution. Thanks to the development of information technologies, the automation of the process of conducting court cases and the introduction of intelligent systems have become urgent tasks for improving judicial justice. The justice sector has been slower than other sectors to adopt artificial intelligence and information technology (IT) in general. However, in most countries the amount of digital information resulting from the use of IT in legal proceedings is increasing. In this regard, the possibility of using artificial intelligence (AI) in the work of judicial bodies, prosecutor's offices and other specialized judicial bodies around the world is increasingly being investigated. Jurisprudence includes a wide range of problems and, accordingly, different sources of data for their solution. Using legislation, materials of criminal and administrative cases, concluded contracts and other legal documents, relevant specialists make decisions. In turn, artificial intelligence technologies, according to examples in other domains, can become assistants for specialists or make decisions in an autonomous mode.. The purpose of the article. To review the existing approaches to the application of artificial intelligence in the judicial system, to find out the shortcomings, advantages and limitations of machine learning algorithms in the judicial system. Determine the goals and methodology for further research. Results. In this work, the application of machine learning methods for solving problems arising in the field of jurisprudence is considered, algorithms, data sets and goals for further work are defined. Keywords: recurrent neural networks, machine learning, vectorization, text classification.

The development of digital technologies has inevitably put on the agenda the problems of their application in judicial activity, primarily in justice in civil cases. Digitalization is actively penetrating the legal proceedings, procedural legislation and approaches to its application are changing. At the same time, traditional forms of judicial activity remain. The range of directions for the introduction of modern technologies is expanding following the achievements of scientific and technological progress. The author sets out to identify the relationship between the use of information technology and improving the efficiency of justice. The study showed that digital technologies can become an effective means of ensuring the effectiveness of civil and arbitration proceedings, reducing its costs and reducing the time for resolving cases. Digital technologies are able to ensure the efficiency of legal proceedings in modern conditions; however, they carry risks and problems, the solution of which should be suggested by procedural science. A special role is assigned to artificial intelligence technologies and machine learning methods. Scientists argue about the possibilities and social justification of their use in judicial activity. The attitude towards artificial intelligence on the part of specialists is extremely restrained. However, the experience of China, the USA, Germany, as well as domestic developments indicate an increasingly active and inevitable introduction of artificial intelligence into the system of civil jurisdiction. At the present stage, there is no point in discussing the possibility of using artificial intelligence in the civil process; it seems more productive to discuss its conditions and potential. In the paper, for the first time in Russian procedural science, it is proposed to consider the effectiveness of judicial protection implemented with its support as a key condition for the use of artificial intelligence in civil and arbitration proceedings. The author’s conclusions can be applied in practical activities to improve justice and procedural legislation.

The deployment of artificial intelligence in legal practice and judicial systems raises a range of ethical and practical challenges that go beyond questions of technical performance. These challenges affect the core values of the legal profession and the judiciary, including confidentiality, professional independence, accountability, procedural fairness, and public trust in the administration of justice. While AI systems are often presented as neutral technological tools designed to enhance efficiency, their integration into legal decision-making processes has a significant influence on professional responsibilities and institutional safeguards. This paper addresses certain risks associated with the use of AI in legal practice and the judiciary, with particular attention to their normative implications. Further, it also analyses the deployment of such systems in Europe based on the provisions of the legally binding AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689), and the Council of Europe Framework AI Convention (Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law, no. 225, 2024) while taking account of OECD AI Principles.

This study investigates the legitimacy of relying on Artificial Intelligence (AI) in deriving Islamic legal rulings (fatwas), and outlines the necessary legal, technical, and ethical safeguards. The research poses a central question: Can AI serve as an independent agent of ijtihad (Islamic legal reasoning)? Using descriptive, analytical, and comparative methodologies, the paper examines practical cases such as fatwa chatbots, automated contract systems, and forensic image analysis in Sharia contexts. The findings confirm that AI lacks the qualifications required for legal and moral accountability—such as consciousness, intention, and jurisprudential reasoning—and therefore cannot independently issue fatwas. However, AI can be employed as an auxiliary tool under strict scholarly supervision. The paper concludes with a set of comprehensive guidelines ensuring the integration of AI into Islamic jurisprudence remains subservient to established doctrinal authority.

The massive adoption of electronic systems in virtually every human activity generates a great amount of digital evidence, which must be used by judges to understand facts that took place and feel more confident when judging legal processes as per one's inner belief. In contrast, evidence collection and analysis are increasingly expensive and time-consuming activities, as said evidence quickly become more complex, borderless and safeguarded by privacy protection features. Conflicts between police authorities, judges, manufacturers and consumers are common when legal provisions for breaking telematics secrecy are thwarted due to encryption of communication and stored data, a situation that tends to escalate due to new technologies such as cloud services, Internet of Things, artificial intelligence, robots and drones. In this context, forensic investigators require increasingly sophisticated laboratories capable of carrying out the legal encryption breach through mechanisms such as brute force or chip-off, among many other computing forensics techniques. It happens that current laboratories are not sufficient to supply the increasing demand and, in addition, said laboratories are concentrated on the main economic centers, therefore, away from thousands of districts in which legal processes are treated. Data volatility and test complexity require participation from authors and defendants in the legal process, so that invaluable technical adversarial proceedings and debates between specialists from the parties may take place, avoiding curtailment of defense. However, this monitoring is hampered, and even prevented, by poor productivity of the laboratories in face of the demand and distance between the district, expert approved by the judge and forensic laboratories. The speed of this revolution and scarcity of qualified laboratories overburden expert services, cause mistakes and confusion among legal processes, leading to the risk of acquitting guilty parties or, even worse, convicting innocent parties. In order to address this issue, it is proposed that forensic laboratories adopt a technology for remotely usable laboratories, called WebLab, and that these laboratories are therefore integrated in federations of Forensic WebLabs, as to provide the police chief, judge, prosecutor, attorneys, expert assigned by the judge and representatives of the parties to perform or remotely follow expert forensic tests, maximizing national and international utilization of better equipped laboratories and providing simultaneous and crucial supervision by the Judiciary and the parties of legal processes. In summary, this study proposes a reference model that enables use of forensic laboratories via the Web.

The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into judicial systems has introduced transformative efficiencies in legal processes, including case management, evidence evaluation, and decision support. However, these developments raise significant concerns regarding the protection of the right to a fair trial, a cornerstone of international human rights law. This paper critically examines the emerging threats posed by AI to procedural fairness, focusing on issues of transparency, algorithmic bias, accountability, and judicial independence. Drawing on contemporary scholarship, it argues that the opacity of AI systems undermines the principle of reasoned judgments, while data-driven biases risk reinforcing systemic inequalities (Molbæk-Steensig &amp; Quemy, 2023; Zuiderveen Borgesius, 2020). Furthermore, the diffusion of responsibility between developers and legal institutions complicates accountability frameworks (Katyal, 2019). The study highlights the urgent need for robust regulatory mechanisms, explainable AI models, and sustained human oversight to safeguard fundamental rights. It concludes that without deliberate governance, the deployment of AI in the judiciary may erode trust in legal systems and compromise the integrity of justice.

This study deals with uncovering the increasing role of artificial intelligence in the medical field with special attention to its applications and how doctors benefit from it. The study used the descriptive method on a random sample of 50 doctors, and collected the study data on the questionnaire technique. In the end, the study concluded that artificial intelligence receives great attention in medical affairs and has a high impact on doctors through medical awareness, professional development, and medical diagnosis. At the conclusion of the study, it was emphasised that artificial intelligence does not replace doctors, but rather is an auxiliary tool that can develop their capabilities and improve the quality of medical care offered to patients. However, the study emphasises the need to maintain human and ethical oversight in the use of these technologies to ensure the protection and fairness of patients.

This chapter studies some of the most important ethical topics involving the use of artificial intelligence (AI) within the legal system itself and examines how central legal values might unintentionally or intentionally change with increased use of AI in law. Ethical issues surrounding AI use in law often share a common theme. As AI becomes increasingly integrated within the legal system, how can society ensure that core legal values are preserved? Among the most important of these legal values are: equal treatment under the law; legal results arising from law, principle, and facts rather than social status or power; procedural fairness and due process; fairness in design and application of the law; transparency in legal substance and process; adequate access to justice for all; integrity and honesty in creation and application of law; and judicial, legislative, and administrative efficiency. The central ethical challenge is to identify the ways in which the use of AI may be shifting core legal values and to ensure that these crucial values are preserved in the technological transition. A more positive view also identifies the ways in which AI technology can not only preserve central values, but rather, can foster and enhance these values to the betterment of the legal system and society overall.

Dear Editor, I recently had the pleasure of reading the interesting article by Freitas and colleagues entitled ‘ChatGPT-4 as an auxiliary tool in temporomandibular disorders diagnostics: An opinion’,1 and I wish to contribute my reflections on this topic. While acknowledging the authors' efforts to explore the potential of ChatGPT-4 as a tool to aid in the diagnosis of temporomandibular joint disorders (TMD),1 the incorporation of such a tool into daily clinical practice warrants thorough and thoughtful analysis. While it is undeniable that artificial intelligence (AI) has become a pivotal component in various healthcare realms,2, 3 it is vital to understand that its implementation as a diagnostic tool cannot be undertaken without duly considering its limitations and ethical implications.4 While the authors argue that ChatGPT-4 may enhance diagnostic accuracy,1 it is crucial to recognize that this tool does not replace the need for human supervision and judgement. The authors mention a study conducted by Russe and colleagues,5 which addresses the comparison between the performance of ChatGPT and that of human radiologists in classifying fractures based on radiological reports. This study is relevant for providing a comparative analysis between ChatGPT's capability and the expertise of radiology professionals in accurately identifying fractures from radiological data.5 However, even though the tool achieved a reported accuracy of 86%, this number still falls short of the 95% attained by human radiologists.5 This 9% difference in accuracy is substantial and underscores the crucial importance of human interpretation in diagnostic accuracy. While technological advancements have shown considerable improvements in diagnostic accuracy,6 it is essential to emphasize that human interpretation goes beyond mere pattern recognition in images. Radiologists, when examining images, apply their clinical knowledge, consider the patient's history, and evaluate case nuances for a precise and comprehensive diagnosis. The ability to contextualize information beyond what is presented in images is a vital aspect that even the most advanced AI cannot fully replicate, potentially representing a significant gap in accurate diagnosis,5, 6 especially in a complex field like TMD, where precision is fundamental for appropriate treatment. Therefore, while acknowledging the advancements and potential contributions of ChatGPT-4 as a complementary tool in medical diagnosis, it is imperative to highlight that human supervision and clinical judgement remain irreplaceable.4, 7 Accuracy, contextualization, and understanding of the complete clinical picture are critical elements that only human healthcare professionals can offer, thereby ensuring the quality and safety of patient care. Furthermore, excessive and indiscriminate use of ChatGPT raises significant ethical concerns. Who would be responsible in instances of diagnostic errors: the technology itself or the professionals utilizing it?7 Additionally, there is a growing concern regarding the contemporary generation, increasingly dependent on these advanced tools, neglecting the pursuit of information from traditional sources and disregarding the enhancement of fundamental analytical skills.4 This excessive reliance on automated tools may undermine healthcare professionals' ability to consider an extensive range of clinical and contextual data, crucial elements for accurate diagnosis and effective therapeutic intervention. This issue raises concerns about the education of healthcare professionals who become overly reliant on these technologies, at the expense of valuing clinical knowledge and human reasoning abilities, indispensable elements in medical practice.4 In summary, while recognizing the potential benefits of ChatGPT-4 in interpreting radiological images, I strongly emphasize the need for rigorous ethical scrutiny, comprehensive clinical validation, and in-depth studies to assess its safety and efficacy before its widespread implementation in clinical practice. The integration of AI technologies in clinical practice must be accompanied by clear ethical guidelines, extensive training, and careful supervision to ensure the integrity and quality of healthcare provided to patients. The integration of AI in medicine should be approached cautiously and thoughtfully to ensure that the benefits outweigh the risks and that the quality and safety of patient care remain paramount. No conflicts of interest were declared concerning the publication of this article.

Discussion of artificial intelligence (AI) is pervasive in current academia. However, it seems that from a philosophical point of view one of the most interesting questions is whether artificial intelligence could entail the existence of a conscious entity. In this paper, the first part provides a definition of artificial intelligence and distinguishes between instrumental artificial intelligence and artificial general intelligence (AGI). The second part analyses our motives for constructing AGI in addition to instrumental AI. The third part deals with arguments for and against the possibility of constructing AGI. The final part provides an argument for the conclusion that a being with AGI could indeed be conscious, and therefore should be considered ethically as an end-in-itself.