Artificial Intelligence and administration of justice

Abstract

If there is a human discipline in which the significate of the implications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) can have personal, social, or political important changes, it is the one referred to the applications of laws and justice. On the one hand, as a reflection of one of the three branches of any democratic state and, on the other, as a result of the final decisions on the most important personal conflicts of current societies through the application and progressive interpretation of the legal norms that we have all given ourselves for this purpose. Therefore, the control, regulation, configuration strategies and limits of Artificial Intelligence systems that are generated by Natural Intelligence regarding the administration of justice must be sufficiently rigid to prevent a use aimed at the mediatization of those responsible for the application of the rules (judges and other legal operators) either through the imposition of previously conditioned parameters for artificial intelligence systems or through them. It must also be the result of a social consensus in which respect for human rights, user information and the maintenance of the human referent as an essential part of the gear prevail. Artificial Intelligence, like the natural human intelligence that generates it, will not always, unfortunately, be articulated to seek good objectives. In a summary phrase attributed to Neil Jacobstein: "it's not artificial intelligence that worries me, it's human stupidity".