PROSPECTS OF THE APPLICABILITY OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE RIGHT TO DEFENSE

Artificial intelligence has moved from the margins of legal practice to its infrastructure. This article argues that the criminal defense bar should treat AI not as a threat to be resisted but as a tool that must be integrated into the exercise of the right to defense, and that the terms of that integration are set by the defense lawyer’s existing duties rather than by the technology itself. Drawing on the European Convention on Human Rights, the Constitution and legislation of the Republic of Armenia, the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence (signed by Armenia in January 2026), recent professional guidance and the case law of 2023–2026, the article identifies three limits on responsible integration: the protection of confidentiality and of the secrecy of the pretrial investigation, illustrated by United States v Heppner; the duty of candor in the face of AI “hallucinations”, now recorded in more than two thousand judicial decisions worldwide; and the equality-of-arms problem raised by opaque AI systems deployed against the accused. It concludes with proposals for procedural reform.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
State and Law
Published
2026-11-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.46991/sl/2026.sp2.104
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
NOV
article

PROSPECTS OF THE APPLICABILITY OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE RIGHT TO DEFENSE

Lusine Hovhannisyan
State and Law
Artificial Intelligence in Law
article

PROSPECTS OF THE APPLICABILITY OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE RIGHT TO DEFENSE

Lusine Hovhannisyan
article en

Abstract

Artificial intelligence has moved from the margins of legal practice to its infrastructure. This article argues that the criminal defense bar should treat AI not as a threat to be resisted but as a tool that must be integrated into the exercise of the right to defense, and that the terms of that integration are set by the defense lawyer’s existing duties rather than by the technology itself. Drawing on the European Convention on Human Rights, the Constitution and legislation of the Republic of Armenia, the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence (signed by Armenia in January 2026), recent professional guidance and the case law of 2023–2026, the article identifies three limits on responsible integration: the protection of confidentiality and of the secrecy of the pretrial investigation, illustrated by United States v Heppner; the duty of candor in the face of AI “hallucinations”, now recorded in more than two thousand judicial decisions worldwide; and the equality-of-arms problem raised by opaque AI systems deployed against the accused. It concludes with proposals for procedural reform.

State and Law
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
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.

Laika access coming soon