|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
In a groundbreaking development, the Singapore Courts have entered into a transformative two-year partnership with an innovative American legal AI startup. This aims to usher in a new era of accessibility to justice through the development of a cutting-edge generative AI programme tailored for users of the Small Claims Tribunals. Justice Aedit Abdullah recently shed light on this groundbreaking initiative at a media briefing held within the hallowed halls of the Supreme Court.
At the heart of this initiative lies the utilisation of generative AI, a branch of deep learning algorithms that has the capacity to generate high-quality texts, images, and other content based on the data upon which they were trained. The Singapore Courts have undertaken this endeavour with the aim of enhancing access to justice, striving to offer easily accessible information and user-friendly processes for the layman.
In the process of small claims consultations and hearings, the presence of lawyers is prohibited. However, comprehensive information regarding the small claims process is readily available on the Singapore Courts’ website.
Despite this wealth of information, Justice Abdullah acknowledges the possibility that certain members of the public may struggle to navigate the digital resources, either due to a limited understanding of the intricacies of the Small Claims Tribunals or specific questions that elude satisfactory answers. It is the hope of the Singapore Courts that this novel AI programme can bridge these gaps by providing users with a comprehensive overview of the process.
But the ambitions of this AI programme don’t stop at just information dissemination. It aspires to assist users in filing their claims accurately by auto-filling forms with the information provided or pointing out areas where information is incomplete.
Justice Abdullah offered an illustrative example: imagine a scenario where a consumer purchases a defective washing machine for S$2,000 from an online shopping platform and wishes to file a claim against the supplier at the Small Claims Tribunals.
In such a case, the AI programme should ideally be capable of advising the user on the necessity of having the receipt, providing evidence of the malfunction, and demonstrating that the defect was not the result of user error. The High Court judge also emphasised the importance of allowing defendants to present their side of the story.
Beyond simplifying the process, the AI programme aims to go even further by providing insight into potential claim outcomes and amounts, ultimately encouraging parties to reach settlements or consider mediation. To achieve this, the AI model will be trained on redacted case files and judgments released by the tribunals and magistrates.
However, Justice Abdullah is keenly aware of the potential pitfalls associated with AI. He emphasised the need to prevent false information from being generated by the system and to ensure robust protection of the information uploaded or provided to the system. These concerns reflect the delicate balance between embracing technological innovation and safeguarding the integrity of the legal process.
Justice Abdullah acknowledges the potential automation of legal tasks through generative AI, emphasising the need for lawyers to acquire tech skills. He proposes alternative training methods to compensate for routine task removal.
The court system’s primary duty, he asserts, is ensuring a user-friendly experience amidst evolving legal landscapes. To aid those less tech-savvy, the courts consider involving volunteers in guiding users through AI processes.
The success of this initiative could extend to other legal areas, promising accessible justice in Singapore and beyond through pioneering AI. Adapting to change is essential for a seamless, painless court experience in the modern era.
