The verdict of the Yeisk City Court of Krasnodar Krai unexpectedly became a reason for discussions about the role of artificial intelligence in the judicial system. The convicted former police officers found its content strange—the text contained expressions like "a galaxy of lawyers" and "a decisive official," and the style was overloaded with ponderous constructions.
Lawyers suggested that the verdict could have been written by a neural network. A linguist they brought in confirmed: the text indeed shows signs of machine generation—mixing of styles, repetitive constructions, and empty phrases. But proving the use of AI turned out to be difficult.
The courts refused to overturn the verdict. The Krasnodar Regional Court stated that the peculiarities of form and style do not indicate the illegality of the decision. The cassation court added: the law does not contain a prohibition on the use of technical means or computer programs for preparing judicial acts.
The Supreme Court also did not refer the case for consideration. Formally, no court established that the text was actually created by a neural network. But the important question remains open: can a judge delegate the preparation of a judicial act to artificial intelligence, and if so, where are the boundaries of what is permissible?
This case is not only about law but also about technology. With the growing popularity of AI, such disputes could become regular. Lawyers have already stated that they will appeal to the Constitutional Court to seek clarity.
Comments
0No comments yet.