Data analytics in judicial decision making: Enhancing transparency or undermining independence?

Data analytics in legal decision-making is fast moving into the mainstream as courts everywhere try to bring their processes up-to-date and improve their effectiveness, consistency and openness. With the help of algorithms, large sets of data and predictive justice models, courts can analyze their past decisions, assist in choosing the right outcome and deal with inconsistencies that may arise in discretionary systems. People who support using technology in the courtroom believe it helps judges be held accountable, reveals problem areas, leads to needed changes and improves public trust. The issue with AI in law is that it could threaten judicial independence by using algorithmic techniques developed by different organizations which might lead to mistakes and ruin proper reasoning. Some point out that AI might include biases from history and this could lead judges to trust the algorithm’s decisions and neglect its impact on fairness, causing the algorithm to be favored over regular due process. Through researching writings, judicial rulings and new technologies, this study investigates the conflicts generated by the shift and proposes how to regulate legal data science to maintain judicial fairness, lawful procedure and the credibility of legal organizations. To sum up, technology cannot replace human experience, ethics and judicial values in changing the justice system.

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2025-06-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17198246
Primary Topic
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Data analytics in judicial decision making: Enhancing transparency or undermining independence?

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
article

Data analytics in judicial decision making: Enhancing transparency or undermining independence?

article en

Abstract

Data analytics in legal decision-making is fast moving into the mainstream as courts everywhere try to bring their processes up-to-date and improve their effectiveness, consistency and openness. With the help of algorithms, large sets of data and predictive justice models, courts can analyze their past decisions, assist in choosing the right outcome and deal with inconsistencies that may arise in discretionary systems. People who support using technology in the courtroom believe it helps judges be held accountable, reveals problem areas, leads to needed changes and improves public trust. The issue with AI in law is that it could threaten judicial independence by using algorithmic techniques developed by different organizations which might lead to mistakes and ruin proper reasoning. Some point out that AI might include biases from history and this could lead judges to trust the algorithm’s decisions and neglect its impact on fairness, causing the algorithm to be favored over regular due process. Through researching writings, judicial rulings and new technologies, this study investigates the conflicts generated by the shift and proposes how to regulate legal data science to maintain judicial fairness, lawful procedure and the credibility of legal organizations. To sum up, technology cannot replace human experience, ethics and judicial values in changing the justice system.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 27%
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.