Judiciary weighs opportunities and risks of AI
Artificial intelligence is becoming a governance issue for South Africa’s judiciary, with judicial candidates being questioned about how courts should approach a technology that could improve efficiency while creating new risks around confidentiality, accountability and independence.
The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) is currently assessing candidates for vacancies on the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA). Five judges are being considered for three positions on the appellate court.
The discussion around AI has provided an early indication of the issues that could shape the judiciary’s approach to the technology.
KwaZulu-Natal High Court Judge Mokgere Masipa told the commission that she had participated in the judiciary’s AI Committee, which is working on a framework for the technology’s use in the courts.
Masipa said the proposed policy is intended to allow the judiciary to take advantage of technological developments without weakening the constitutional principle of judicial independence.
A draft was presented at a judges’ conference earlier this year, with further work focused on issues including institutional oversight and the protection of data.
The policy question is becoming increasingly urgent as AI tools become more capable of assisting with research, drafting, information retrieval and other professional tasks.
For the courts, however, the potential efficiency gains must be balanced against the particular responsibilities of judicial officers. The use of AI raises questions about the reliability of information produced by automated systems, responsibility for errors, confidentiality and the handling of sensitive court information.
Masipa said the development of the policy was approaching its next stage, but that practical questions remained about how it would be applied throughout the court system.
Judge Gerald Bloem, who was among the candidates interviewed, indicated a more cautious position on the technology.
The JSC’s deliberations form part of a wider judicial recruitment process. Forty-four candidates are expected to be interviewed for 22 vacancies across 11 courts, including the SCA, divisions of the High Court and specialist courts dealing with areas such as labour, competition and electoral matters.
The prominence of AI in the interviews suggests that the judiciary is moving towards a more formal debate about the role technology should play in the administration of justice.
The challenge will be to establish rules that allow courts to benefit from innovation without allowing technological convenience to undermine the independence, confidentiality and accountability on which public confidence in the justice system depends.