The Role of AI in the Effective Dispensation of Justice in the Nigerian Judicial System

ByAkinoluwa Akinpelu

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is the technology that makes it possible for computers and other devices to mimic human intelligence and problem-solving skills such as the capacity for logic, finding meaning, generalization, and experience-based learning. It generally describes computer programs that are able to carry out sophisticated operations that were previously limited to humans, such as problem-solving, thinking, and decision-making. AI has made it possible for us to gather, process, and analyze vast volumes of data quicker than in the past. Its impact is seen in the way it is revolutionizing different sectors such as healthcare, banking, education and commerce. New technologies have been developed as a result, and numerous industries have seen improvements in operations and overall efficiency. Additionally, companies leverage AI-powered technologies to enhance user experience and provide more
customized services and recommendations. A few applications of AI in our daily lives are digital assistants, GPS navigation, autonomous vehicle technology, and generative AI tools (like Open AI’s Chat GPT).1

Tasks that would normally require human intelligence or intervention can be completed by AI with its potential applications expanding daily. It is well known that one of the enduring issues facing Nigeria’s judiciary is its increasing caseload. As a result of this, the judiciary needs to adopt new processes that will result in a faster and more efficient justice system. Efforts are being made to significantly increase the usage of emerging technologies, with responsible artificial intelligence (AI) at the forefront of potential solutions.

This article explores the potential application of AI in the Nigerian Judicial System.

THE ROLE OF AI IN THE EFFECTIVE DISPENSATION OF JUSTICE IN THE NIGERIAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM

The judicial system is one sector that is long overdue to benefit from the application of AI. This is because data is the lifeblood of AI and the legal system produces large amounts of data. With each new case filed in court and court judgment delivered, the dataset continues to grow. Texts, documents, and language are the basic materials used in legal and judicial proceedings.2 The more an AI tool is used, the better the quality of its results. As the dataset grows, the results will be more accurate than they were previously. Large amounts of data including statutes, regulations, documents, practice notes, law reviews, white papers, pleadings, judgments and news reports are available for judicial agencies to use in training both conventional and generative AI foundation models.

According to the National Judicial Policy of the National Judicial Council, the judiciary at both the Federal and State levels of government in Nigeria is responsible for providing “a fair, transparent, and impartial administration of justice in accordance with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the law and other good practices.”3 Therefore, any application of AI by the judiciary or on its behalf must be compliant with the judiciary’s overall duty to safeguard the integrity of the administration of justice.

AI is not new to the Nigerian Judicial System. Many indigenous legal research tools used by legal practitioners have adopted the technology to improve their operation. So, the question is not whether the Nigerian Judicial system should adopt AI. The crux of the issue is what further role artificial intelligence can play in facilitating the effective administration of justice. AI can significantly transform the legal system, particularly as it applies to the judicial system.

Some of transformational uses of AI to the Judicial System are:

  1. Transcription: Artificial Intelligence transcription is the technique of automatically translating audio and video recordings into text by using machine learning algorithms and speech recognition.4 This system can detect numerous speakers at once and properly transcribe conversations as they happen. With continued usage, the software learns to become even more accurate at transcription. The basis of automated transcription is speech-to-text technology. It eliminates the need for labor-intensive manual procedures like having a note-taker or assistant jot down every word. Most judges in Nigeria bear the burden of manually writing the record of proceedings in court including the testimony of witnesses. This greatly slows down the court proceedings. The Moroccan judiciary has recently adopted an AI program that transcribes judges’ decisions instead of having to write them by hand.5 In order to preserve the credibility of court proceedings, transcripts need to be reliable and accurate. Innocent people can be found guilty if there is an error in transcription. While AI is capable of producing extremely accurate transcripts, combining the technology with human editors will result in greater speed and precise results.
  2. Proof-reading: AI offers proofreading tools that can assist Lawyers and Judges in improving their work by identifying and fixing issues with grammar, clarity, punctuation and tone of voice. It provides recommendations on how to make the final document better so that it is professional and compelling. Uncertainties could make a contract unenforceable because a legally binding document must meet certain standards. Also, a document that is accurate and unambiguous has a lower chance of becoming involved in a dispute. AI tools for proof-reading also help to save time.
  3. Decision-making: There are two general components to the application of AI to judicial decision making. The first involves the use of a fully automated judicial model that makes decisions and eliminates the need for a human judge. The outcome of a significant number of routine cases is predictable. In those situations, the court decision can be a document generated through a mostly automated process using provided data. This entails applying precise guidelines to undisputed facts. The filing party must supply the data digitally in this case so that it does not need to be manually reentered. Furthermore, because the result is mostly
    definite, case processing can be partially or even fully automated if the outcome is foreseeable. However, this first view raises questions as to whether it is constitutional for an AI trained robot to act as a Judge in a case. The qualification for different categories of judicial officers is contained in the constitution, one of which is that the person must be qualified to practice law
    in Nigeria (apart from Kadis and Judges of the Customary Court of Appeal)6 and must have at least a particular year of experience.7 It would appear on the face of it that a robot judge is inconsistent with the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The second view involves the use of AI as a judicial aide/adviser instead of a replacement. This advisory paradigm is predicated on assisting the human judge rather than taking his place. After doing a preliminary review of the case, the algorithm would recommend a decision to a judge. A judge would have the discretion to rule, and he or she might accept the system’s recommended conclusion in full, disagree with it in part, or reject it completely.8
  4. Legal research and Analysis: AI has revolutionized the field of legal research by streamlining and automating the retrieval and analysis of legal information, enabling faster, more accurate findings. Incorporating AI into legal research involves using a number of tools to quickly and effectively sort through legal documents, extract important data, and produce in-depth insights to assist with legal strategies and decision-making. Regarding legal analysis, AI can handle and analyze huge and complex datasets, swiftly detecting patterns and relevant information, whereas traditional legal analysis is restricted to the researcher’s capacity to locate and comprehend relevant material.
  5. Summarization: AI technology can be used to condense text, documents, or other content into a brief and comprehensible format. Key information can be extracted from research, news articles, legal and financial documents by AI-powered summarization.
  6. Administrative Tasks: AI can also improve the efficiency of administrative processes such as case management, resource allocation, case assignment, and data input. By reducing manual labor and streamlining processes, AI helps courts manage their caseloads more efficiently, which leads to a shorter backlog and faster case resolution.
  7. Translation: AI models can currently translate any kind of text and have progressively improved multilingual skills. The Tanzanian judiciary has adopted an AI translation tool to cater for its diverse population.9 To enable accurate and understandable translations across the nation’s linguistic landscape, the system was trained using diverse datasets, including various dialects across communities. With an estimated four hundred indigenous languages, Nigeria is a multilingual nation. The adoption of a translation service will save a significant amount of time for the courts as many cases are adjourned and delayed because of the absence of an interpreter. It will also boost confidence in the judicial process as it enhances the right to fair hearing. It is a constitutional right for every person charged with a criminal offence to have the assistance of an interpreter for free if he cannot understand the language used at the trial of the offence.10

CHALLENGES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ADOPTION OF AI TOOLS IN THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM

There are numerous challenges associated with the adoption of AI in the Nigerian Judicial System. The major challenges are:

  1. Transparency: AI companies often use trade secrets as an excuse for not disclosing their algorithms. These concerns raise suspicion on the possibility of excessive influence on the court as well as the maintenance of its independence. In addition to defending a court’s discretionary power to reject the machine recommendations, judges and attorneys must push for complete transparency and disclosure regarding the AI techniques utilized when preparing briefs and delivering judgements. The judiciary and the legal system as a whole will have to develop guidelines for the use of AI as a form of regulation.
  2. Misinformation: These days, litigants without legal representation use AI chatbots to get information and legal advice. They can be the only platform that can offer some litigants immediate guidance or support. Litigants rarely possess the independent
    abilities necessary to verify legal material presented by them and they may not be mindful of the fact that AI chatbots are prone to inaccuracy.11
  3. Bias: AI tools are trained with existing data. This may lead to the perpetuation of existing bias against certain groups.
  4. Legal Ethics: The use of AI tools can lead to breaches in the Rules of professional conduct for legal practitioners. In the legal profession, maintaining confidentiality of client communication is essential.12 By using AI tools, the lawyer stands the risk of
    disclosing a client’s confidential information to third parties. The lawyer also has a duty to devote his attention, energy and expertise to the service of his client and act in a manner consistent with the best interest of his client.13 Any negligence in handling a client’s case as a result of overreliance on AI may result in professional misconduct.
  5. Data Privacy: Lawyers run the risk of jeopardizing the security and privacy of their
    clients’ data when they can utilize AI to examine cases.

CONCLUSION

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has enormous potential to support judicial proceedings, leading to increased access to justice, lower costs, and shorter trials in court. However, its application raises concerns about transparency, objectivity and perpetuation of bias. It will only be a matter of time until artificial intelligence (AI) systems are fully integrated into the courts due to technological advancements and global changes. Factors like a reduction in court costs and a shorter time frame for case examination support the implementation of such systems.

This does not imply that the proceedings’ speed has an absolute value. The quality of these proceedings or the application of other legal standards shouldn’t suffer as a result of the desire for expeditious proceedings. Although it is often said that “justice delayed is justice denied and justice rushed is equally justice denied14, Justice delayed is better than injustice15. The appropriate balance was aptly captured by the Supreme Court in the case of Owunna v. State16 as follows:
“Even though it is the desire of all involved in the administration of justice to uphold the principle which states that “justice delayed is justice denied”, it is equally unacceptable to encourage or do injustice in an attempt at speedy dispensation of justice. Justice may be slow sometimes, but it will surely arrive at its destination. Justice rushed is a travesty of justice and a threat to the fabric that binds civilized society together. The balance is what the law seeks when justice is to be administered, as it is equally said that delayed justice is as equally untoward and unconscionable as hurried justice. Hence, while justice delayed is tantamount to justice denied; similarly, hurried is harried justice. Both are to be avoided in the pursuit of justice”.

REFERENCE

1 What is artificial intelligence (AI)? https://www.ibm.com/topics/artificial-intelligence. Accessed 20 Nov 2024.
2 Judicial systems are turning to AI to help manage vast quantities of data and expedite case resolution.
https://www.ibm.com/blog/judicial-systems-are-turning-to-ai-to-help-manage-its-vast-quantities-of-data-and-
expedite-case-resolution/ Accessed 20 Dec 2024.
3 The National Judicial Policy paragraph 5.3, https://njc.gov.ng/national-judicial-policy. Accessed 20 Dec 2024.
4 What is artificial intelligence transcription and why you don’t need transcription software
https://www.dialpad.com/blog/artificial-intelligence-transcription/#:~:text=Artificial%20intelligence%20tr
anscription%20refers%20to,and%20video%20recordings%20into%20text.
5 Morocco judges to use AI tool to transcribe verdicts,
https://trtafrika.com/africa/morocco-judges-to-use-ai-tool-to-transcribe-verdicts-18172234) Accessed 02
Feb 2025.
6 Section 261(3)(b), 266(3)(b), 276(3)(b), 281(3)(b) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999.
7 Section 231(3), 238(3), 250(3), 254B(3)(4), 256(3), 261(3)(a), 266(3)(a), 271(3), 276(3)(a), 281(3)(a) of the
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999.
8 Nowotko, P. M. (2020). AI in judicial application of law and the right to a court. Procedia Computer Science,
192, 2220-2228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.08.235
9 Tanzania’s court system goes for AI solutions.
africa-legal.com/news/tanzanias-court-system-goes-for-ai-solutions/102631. Accessed 02 Feb 2025.
10 Section 36(6)(e) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999.
11 Artificial Intelligence (AI): Guidance for Judicial Office Holders 12 December 2023.
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/AI-Judicial-Guidance.pdf
12 Rule 19 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2023
13 Rule 14 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2023
14 F.R.N. v. Yahaya (2019) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1670) 85 (P. 104, para. G-H)
15 Ibe v. Onuorah (1998) 7 NWLR (Pt. 558) 383 (P. 393, para. G)
16 (2022) 11 NWLR (Pt. 1842) 477 (P. 485, para. C-E)

Similar Posts