Judges and lawyers cannot be driven by AI: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan at MNLU Symposium on AI

Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan recently observed that judges or lawyers powered by Artificial Intelligence cannot replace human judges or lawyers..“'AI Judges' have often been talked about. Can these give justice? Judges and lawyers cannot be driven by AI in 95 per cent of the cases. When we are dealing with natural persons, the dignity of humans is paramount and must be respected. Individual autonomy must be protected,” Justice Bhuyan said.Justice Bhuyan was speaking at the National Symposium on AI: Privacy, Security and IPR held on April 5 at the Maharashtra National Law University, Mumbai (MNLU Mumbai).The event was organized in association with the Centre for Information Communication Technology and Law (CICTL) and the Centre for Advanced Legal Studies, Training and Research (CALSTAR).Advocate General of Maharashtra, Senior Advocate Dr Birendra Saraf and Vice-Chancellor, MNLU Mumbai, Prof (Dr) Dilip Ukey were also present at the symposium..In his address, Justice Bhuyan discussed the repercussions of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on the legal system, particularly with respect to privacy, data security and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR).He observed that privacy should not be viewed as an isolated notion but rather through the lens of rights-based jurisprudence. He opined that the concept of privacy drew sustenance from the maxim - 'every man's house is his castle.'Justice Bhuyan reinforced the comprehensive nature of privacy as a fundamental right by drawing from the observations of retired Justice Rohinton F Nariman, who referred to Gary Bostwick's conceptual understanding of privacy.The understanding entails three distinct aspects, namely, protection against State intrusion into the physical body, safeguarding personal information from unauthorized use, and preserving the ability to make fundamental personal choices without external interference.However, Justice Bhuyan also acknowledged intrusions to privacy by non-State elements. With pervasive data generation, AI systems could easily dig through one's data and use it for their functioning indiscriminately, he noted.Justice Bhuyan further traced the evolution of the right to privacy in India to emphasise the nature of privacy as a fundamental element of human dignity and an inalienable right. He discussed this through a range of legal cases, from MP Sharma v Satish Chandra, A K Gopalan v Union of India, Maneka Gandhi v Union of India, People's Union for Civil Liberties v Union of India, and Justice K S Puttaswamy (Retd) v Union of India, among others. However, he also observed that the contrasting 'right to know' cannot be ignored, “India is a liberal democracy governed by law wherein on one hand, there is the right to privacy which must be protected and on the other hand there is the right to know which also could not be disregarded. This right to know is a potent weapon in the hands of citizens within the broader framework of democracy," he said. .Parallel to the evolution of privacy rights, Justice Bhuyan also discussed the concept of data security and recent advancements, both in legal frameworks and schemes..While addressing intellectual property rights, Justice Bhuyan reiterated former Chief Justice of India AS Anand’s statement from 1997 that “unlike physical property, IP cannot be easily secured in a deposit box or bank vault." It was precisely this inherent vulnerability that made it prone to strategic exploitation, he noted. Justice Bhuyan added that with the rapid rise of AI and AI-generated innovations, there is a crucial need for policymakers and deliberators to create an adequate framework to protect the products of the human mind..