The Supreme Court of India Proposes New Rules for Using Artificial Intelligence in Law

印度最高法院提議制定法律領域使用人工智慧的新規範


Introduction

The Supreme Court of India has released a draft of new regulations to manage how artificial intelligence (AI) is used in the court system. The main goal is to use technology to help the courts while ensuring that human judges still make all the final legal decisions.

印度最高法院已發佈一份新監管條例草案,旨在管理法院系統如何使用人工智慧(AI)。主要目標是在利用科技協助法院的同時,確保所有最終法律決定仍由人類法官做出。

Main Body

The proposed 'Regulations for Use of Artificial Intelligence in Courts, 2026' create a clear distinction between helpful administrative tasks and forbidden judicial roles. For example, AI can be used for supportive work such as searching for past legal cases, transcribing audio, and summarizing documents. However, the rules strictly forbid using AI to decide the outcome of a case, determine a sentence, or decide if a person should be granted bail. Furthermore, the court will not allow 'black box' systems that lack transparency, nor will it allow AI to profile the behavior of legal professionals.

擬議中的《2026年法院使用人工智慧規範》在有助的行政工作與禁止的司法角色之間劃清了界限。例如,AI可用於支援性工作,如搜尋過往法律案例、音訊轉錄及文件摘要。然而,規範嚴格禁止使用AI來決定案件結果、判定刑期或決定是否准予保釋。此外,法院將不允許缺乏透明度的「黑箱」系統,也不允許AI對法律專業人士的行為進行剖析。

Accountability is a key part of this draft. The regulations state that human lawyers and judges remain responsible for any legal mistakes, even if they used AI. Consequently, legal professionals must officially declare if they used AI in their filings. If AI produces false information—a problem known as 'hallucinations'—the person who submitted the document will be held fully responsible, as technical errors are not an acceptable legal excuse.

問責制是本草案的核心。規範指出,即使使用了AI,人類律師與法官仍需對任何法律錯誤負責。因此,法律專業人士在提交文件時,必須正式聲明是否使用了AI。如果AI產生虛假資訊(即所謂的「幻覺」問題),提交文件的提交者將承擔全部責任,因為技術錯誤並非可接受的法律理由。

Additionally, Chief Justice Surya Kant has emphasized that while AI can reduce delays and improve how justice is delivered, it must follow constitutional values and respect human dignity. He asserted that technology should support the legal system but must not replace human judgment. To manage this, the court proposes creating a permanent oversight body and a specialized research center called CoRE-AI to handle the technical and ethical side of AI implementation.

此外,首席大法官 Surya Kant 強調,雖然AI能減少延遲並改善司法交付,但必須遵循憲法價值並尊重人性尊嚴。他堅稱,科技應支援法律系統,但絕不能取代人類判斷。為了管理此點,法院建議成立一個永久監督機構以及一個名為 CoRE-AI 的專業研究中心,以處理AI實施過程中的技術與倫理面向。

Conclusion

These draft regulations are currently open for public feedback. Stakeholders have until June 20 to provide their comments before the final rules are decided.

這些規範草案目前正對公眾開放徵詢意見。相關利益者可在 6 月 20 日前提供意見,隨後將決定最終規則。

Vocabulary Learning

🚀 THE LEAP: From 'Simple' to 'Sophisticated'

At the A2 level, you usually say 'Because of this' or 'And then'. To reach B2, you need Logical Connectors—words that act like bridges, showing the relationship between two complex ideas.

⚡ The 'Power-Up' Analysis

Look at these three words from the text. They don't just add information; they change the direction of the thought:

  1. "However" \rightarrow Used to introduce a contrast.

    • A2 style: AI can help. But it cannot decide cases.
    • B2 style: AI can be used for supportive work; however, the rules strictly forbid using AI to decide outcomes.
  2. "Consequently" \rightarrow Used to show a direct result (Stronger than 'so').

    • A2 style: Lawyers use AI, so they must say it.
    • B2 style: Human lawyers remain responsible; consequently, they must officially declare if they used AI.
  3. "Furthermore" \rightarrow Used to add a new, important point (Better than 'and' or 'also').

    • A2 style: AI can't decide cases and it can't be a black box.
    • B2 style: AI cannot decide the outcome... furthermore, the court will not allow "black box" systems.

🛠️ Practical Application: The Swap

Stop using these 'A2 words' and start using these 'B2 bridges':

Instead of...Try this...Why?
But\rightarrow HoweverIt sounds more professional and academic.
So\rightarrow ConsequentlyIt shows a logical chain of cause and effect.
Also / And\rightarrow FurthermoreIt signals that you are building a stronger argument.

Coach's Tip: Use these at the beginning of a sentence followed by a comma (e.g., "Consequently, ...") to immediately signal your B2 proficiency to anyone reading your writing.

Vocabulary Learning

distinction (n.)
A clear difference or contrast between two similar things.
Example:The law makes a clear distinction between a mistake and a deliberate crime.
transcribing (v.)
The process of putting thoughts, speech, or data into written or printed form.
Example:The secretary spent the afternoon transcribing the audio recording of the meeting.
transparency (n.)
The quality of being open, honest, and easy to understand, especially regarding rules or decisions.
Example:The public demanded more transparency regarding how the government spends tax money.
accountability (n.)
The fact of being responsible for one's actions and expected to explain them.
Example:There must be greater accountability for officials who fail to protect the environment.
consequently (adv.)
As a result of something that has happened.
Example:He failed to study for the exam; consequently, he did not pass.
emphasized (v.)
Gave special importance or prominence to something in speaking or writing.
Example:The teacher emphasized that the deadline for the project was Friday.
asserted (v.)
Stated a fact or belief confidently and forcefully.
Example:The lawyer asserted that her client was innocent of all charges.
oversight (n.)
The action of overseeing or supervising a process or organization.
Example:The committee provides regulatory oversight to ensure the company follows safety laws.
implementation (n.)
The process of putting a decision, plan, or agreement into effect.
Example:The implementation of the new software took several months to complete.
stakeholders (n.)
People, groups, or organizations that have an interest or concern in something.
Example:The company held a meeting with all stakeholders to discuss the future of the project.
Practice B2 words in a crossword