From the Court Clerk of Criminal Trials to the Algorithm: Technology And The Future Of Court Clerks In Criminal Proceedings

The introduction of artificial intelligence technologies into judicial functions raises new questions that transcend technical efficiency. This article examines philosophically the gradual transition from the human court clerk to automated recording systems in the context of criminal trials. The central question is posed: when algorithms assume the recording of judicial proceedings, does only the method change, or is the very nature of adjudicative work transformed? Through engagement with the philosophy of technology, labor theory, and contemporary critiques of algorithmic systems, it is argued that this replacement does not constitute a simple technological upgrade. Issues of interpretation, understanding, and human presence emerge as critical for the legitimacy of judicial procedure. The article concludes that full automation, despite its advantages in speed and formal accuracy, overlooks dimensions that render justice a fundamentally human endeavor.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Knowledge Commons (Lakehead University)
Published
2025-10-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17613/ay0bn-jvh13
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

From the Court Clerk of Criminal Trials to the Algorithm: Technology And The Future Of Court Clerks In Criminal Proceedings

Knowledge Commons (Lakehead University)
Artificial Intelligence in Law
article

From the Court Clerk of Criminal Trials to the Algorithm: Technology And The Future Of Court Clerks In Criminal Proceedings

article en

Abstract

The introduction of artificial intelligence technologies into judicial functions raises new questions that transcend technical efficiency. This article examines philosophically the gradual transition from the human court clerk to automated recording systems in the context of criminal trials. The central question is posed: when algorithms assume the recording of judicial proceedings, does only the method change, or is the very nature of adjudicative work transformed? Through engagement with the philosophy of technology, labor theory, and contemporary critiques of algorithmic systems, it is argued that this replacement does not constitute a simple technological upgrade. Issues of interpretation, understanding, and human presence emerge as critical for the legitimacy of judicial procedure. The article concludes that full automation, despite its advantages in speed and formal accuracy, overlooks dimensions that render justice a fundamentally human endeavor.

Knowledge Commons (Lakehead University)
Court of Appeal (TH)
Openalex Percentile: Top 37%
Artificial Intelligence in Law
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.