At London Tech Week, Justice Secretary David Lammy unveiled plans to integrate artificial intelligence technology into the justice system. The policies described included developing AI legal assistants with research capabilities and AI tools for judges that can ‘help identify trial-ready cases and group similar hearings together.’
However, the use of AI in the legal system has already caused problems. AI has a tendency to create fake caselaw citations or fabricate quotes entirely – also known as AI hallucinations. Last year, it was found that AI had been used in an £89m damages case against Qatar National Bank in which 40% of the caselaw citations were hallucinated, according to The Guardian.
Lammy’s aim is to cut backlogging and maximize efficiency in the courts. As reported by The Guardian, the Crown court backlog reached a record high of over 80,000 cases this year. Cases are already being booked into 2030. But the concern about AI hallucinations could create additional burdens for lawyers. As reported in The Guardian, Ian Jeffrey, the Chief Executive of the Law Society in England and Wales, says that ‘generative AI requires lawyers to check, review and ensure the accuracy of their work.’
In an interview with Channel 4 News, Lammy was asked if he was worried about AI hallucinations. ‘It can go wrong. Of course it can,’ he responded. ‘It’s why piloting is really important.’ The proposed AI tools will be tested in the Government’s AI Growth Lab, which will create a ‘safe space’ between tech innovators and regulatory bodies.
This is part of a broader movement to integrate AI systems into the justice system. In May, the justice secretary published a White Paper on youth justice reform, which included plans to identify at-risk youth and intervention strategies using AI. In it, Lammy writes, ‘We are clear that this will require strong ethical, technical and operational safeguards to mitigate the risks of stigmatisation, unnecessary criminalisation or biases.’
There are concerns about collaboration between AI companies and the government. Last week, the House of Commons Science, Innovation and Technology Committee published a report on the Government’s efforts to modernize the state. The committee wrote there is ‘no clear plan to translate this vision into a reality.’ A major barrier to the Government’s goals is money. ‘Money is undoubtedly being spent on digital initiatives,’ but there is not enough data on how much money will be needed to implement the modern technology that has been promised.
As reported in The Guardian, Ian Jeffrey highlights the importance of putting the Government’s money into other parts of the justice system. ‘While new technology should enhance access to justice, it cannot replace vital funding and additional court staff,’ he says.
