AI assistants to be rolled out to Crown Courts to help clear backlog of cases
Ministers say the technology will help legal professionals get cases moving faster
Virtual legal assistants powered by artificial intelligence will be rolled out to Crown Courts across the country in an effort to tackle the rising backlog of cases, the Government has announced.
Listen to this article
Ministers say the technology will help legal professionals get cases moving faster.
AI assistants will be trialled in controlled environments before being used by judges and lawyers, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) said.
Judges will also have access to an AI tool for finding trial-ready cases and group similar hearings together to make the most of already stretched court time.
Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy will announce the scheme at London Tech Week on Tuesday, where he will make the case for how AI can drive criminal justice system modernisation.
Read More: OpenAI eyes biggest ChatGPT revamp yet in push to build ‘superapp’ before stock listing
Read More: OpenAI rival Anthropic launches AI assistant Claude in European Union
Mr Lammy said: “Artificial intelligence has the power to transform how we live, work, and govern for the better.
“This impact for good can be seen in our justice system – with thousands of days of admin work saved for our probation staff, and the advent of new tools which aim to cut court backlogs and deliver swifter justice for victims.”
The former barrister is also set to announce that probation officers in England and Wales will be given access to an AI tool that automatically records and transcribes conversations with offenders.
Concerns have been raised about the dangers of ramping up the use of AI.
The Law Society of England and Wales called on the Government to make the outcome of any AI assistant trials public.
Chief executive Ian Jeffery said: “We welcome the MoJ’s acknowledgement of the importance of ensuring safe and ethical use of any new tools, including AI.
“However, for the use of AI in the Crown Court to be effective, the pilot must be thoroughly evaluated.
“The outcomes of these evaluations, along with the impact of AI on the justice system, should be made public.
“While new technology should enhance access to justice, it cannot replace vital funding and additional court staff.
“Robust safeguards are needed to protect us all and preserve the integrity of the justice system.”
A review into the banning of Maccabi Tel Aviv football fans from attending a football match against Aston Villa in November found an “AI hallucination” produced by Microsoft Copilot had helped police justify the move.
The error meant a non-existent game between Tel Aviv and West Ham had been referenced in a report produced by the police force prior to the game.
The number of cases waiting to be dealt with by crown courts in England and Wales hit a record high of more than 80,000 cases earlier this year.
This is more than double the level seen in 2019 (38,108), before the coronavirus pandemic.
Figures obtained by the Press Association under freedom of information laws showed 2,600 crown court trials in England and Wales were not listed until at least 2028, with 29 not due to be heard until 2030.
The Government has announced plans to scale back jury trials in a bid to overhaul the justice system and cut the backlog.
Andrew Thomas KC, vice chair of the Criminal Bar Association, welcomed the use of AI tools in the criminal justice system, and said many routine tasks “can be done quicker and more efficiently through the use of AI tools”.
He added: “There are obvious concerns: the key is to educate judges, criminal barristers and solicitors, and investigators on the safe use of AI, so that its limitations are properly understood by all.
“The quality of justice can never be watered down by taking risks or shortcuts.
“In criminal law, AI is never going to replace the need for skilled criminal barristers and solicitors as lawyers to review a case.
“Criminal law is all about human interactions.
“AI tools lack the social and emotional understanding reliably to identify the significance of every piece of evidence.
“As all lawyers know, the devil is always in the detail, and AI tools should not be used without checks and balances.
“There are plenty of examples of lawyers and judges from civil and even criminal work who have come unstuck from relying on AI-drafted documents without checking the veracity of the content.”