Artificial intelligence and jurisdiction: analytical duty of grounds and the limits to the substitution of humans by algoritics in the field of judicial decision theory

• Autor(a) principal: Siqueira, Dirceu Pereira
• Data de Publicação: 2022
• Outros Autores: Morais, Fausto Santos de, Santos, Marcel Ferreira dos
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Sequência (Florianópolis. Online)
• Texto Completo: https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/sequencia/article/view/90662
• topic: Artificial Intelligence; Decision Making; Analytical Foundation; Explainability; Inteligência Artificial; Tomada de Decisão; Fundamentação Analítica; Explicabilidade

This article aims, in general, to identify the limits to the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in judicial decision making, having as specific objectives: (i) to describe the context of the use of AI from the due legal process; (ii) identify the analytical basis hypotheses provided for in the ordinary legislation and their conformation from the use of AI instruments, with a focus on explainability. The operationalization of jurisdiction, in the current context of a justice system permeated by AI instruments, must find limits in the Constitution of the Republic, in the theory of judicial decision and in specific rules of legal hermeneutics. Such limits, however, were not created with an eye towards AI, which is why there remains the need to identify beacons for the ethical use of technological tools in the Judiciary. As a research problem, we intend to discuss what are the limits to the use of AI in decision making, whether in the civil or criminal fields, based on the so-called analytical reasoning, provided for in articles 489, §1, CPC, and 315, §2, CPP. The procedure method used is the hypothetical-deductive method. The research technique is bibliographic. It is suggested, as a hypothesis, the Judiciary, as an instrument for the protection of fundamental and personality rights, when exercising decision-making based on AI instruments, is limited, in principle, to repetitive decisions devoid of complexity, the which even meet the duty of reasoning when working on the concept of explicability, under penalty of violating due process of law.