The (National Council of Justice) approved on Tuesday (18) rules for use of the judiciary.
In it are defined guidelines for the development, use and governance of solutions developed with artificial intelligence resources. The proposal also establishes a National Judiciary Artificial Intelligence Committee, which will have a number of competences.
The text ponders that the resolution on the subject approved in 2020 focused on procedural management and the effectiveness of the judiciary, while the update with the new rule aims to embrace new technologies, highlighting the Generative AI – as it is the Case of tools like chatgpt and deepseek
Formulated from CNJ coordinated working group debates on the subject, the text was rapporteur for counselor Luiz Fernando Bandeira de Mello, who says goodbye on Tuesday of the board.
In early February, one draft had been presented by the rapporteur, but according to Mello Bandeira said on Tuesday, there were several changes, such as the greatest detail about the operation and also about the composition of the committee and additions about transparency on the use of Ia.
The president of the CNJ and the minister of the (Supreme Federal Court), said that among the counselors there were debates about approving or not a rule, under arguments, for example, of possible plastering of the matter, from the precipitated resolution. But most understood that some guideline is timely.
He argued, on the other hand, that if the rule proves inappropriate or ineffective, it is possible to revise the rules in the future. He also argued that there was already prior resolution and that this would already be an improvement work.
Counselor Alexandre Teixeira made considerations contrary to the approval of the resolution, arguing that it involves many risks and could even generate a possible encouragement of more massive use of artificial intelligence. He added that there would be no such wingspan being approved by the judiciary of other countries.
“I believe that regulation contains the risk of stimulating a kind of production line of judicial decisions,” he says.
According to him, the approval of the rule could pass the message to society and the judiciary that the CNJ understands that the AI should be used “as a kind of panacea”, arguing that this would not be good and that the judiciary’s productivity rate would have had Improvement.
Also the counselor Renata Gil also evaluated regulation as an impertinent, due to technological evolution. He further argued that perhaps it may soon be necessary to review the rules. According to her, law has already been making use much more aggressively of AI tools, without regulating.
