ALGORITHMIC JUSTICE: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE JUDICIARY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

Öz

Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies are increasingly being integrated into legal systems, raising the question of whether AI judges can be utilized in international law. While AI judges offer advantages such as impartiality, speed, and legal consistency, they also pose significant risks concerning the right to a fair trial, accountability, and ethical dilemmas. This study examines the advantages and disadvantages of AI judiciary in international law from a human rights perspective. While AI could enhance judicial neutrality and efficiency, concerns such as the lack of empathy, algorithmic biases, cybersecurity threats, and accountability issues highlight the risks of a fully autonomous judicial system. The study concludes that AI should be used as a supplementary tool in legal processes, but final judicial decisions should remain within the authority of human judges.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• artificial intelligence
• international law
• human rights
• right to a fair trial
• accountability
• algorithmic justice

Algoritmik Adalet: Uluslararası Hukukta Yapay Zeka Hakimliği

Öz

Yapay zekâ (YZ) teknolojileri hukuk sistemlerinde giderek daha fazla kullanılmaktadır. Bu durum, uluslararası hukuk bağlamında yapay zekâ hâkimlerinin kullanılması fikrini gündeme getirmiştir. YZ hâkimleri, tarafsızlık, hız ve hukuki tutarlılık gibi avantajlar sunarken; adil yargılanma hakkı, hesap verebilirlik ve etik sorunlar açısından ciddi riskler taşımaktadır. Bu çalışma, YZ hâkimliğinin uluslararası hukuk açısından avantajlarını ve dezavantajlarını, insan hakları bağlamında detaylandırarak incelemektedir. Çalışmada, YZ’nin tarafsızlık ve verim-lilik açısından sağlayabileceği faydalar ele alınmakta, ancak empati eksikliği, algoritmik önyargılar, siber güvenlik tehditleri ve hukuki hes-ap verebilirlik sorunları nedeniyle tamamen otonom bir yargı sisteminin riskleri vurgulanmaktadır. Sonuç olarak, YZ’nin hukuki süreçlerde yardımcı bir araç olarak kullanılması önerilmekte, ancak nihai kararların insan hâkimler tarafından verilmesi gerektiği savunulmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• yapay zeka
• uluslararası hukuk
• insan hakları
• adil yargılanma hakkı
• hesap verebilirlik
• algoritmik adalet

Kaynakça

1. BORNSTEIN, Aaron M: "Are Algorithms Building the New Infrastructure of Racism?", Nautilus, No. 55. Retrieved January 2, 2018.
2. AHMAD, Nafees: Refugees and Algorithmic Humanitarianism: Applying Artificial Intelligence to RSD Procedures and Immigration Decisions and Making Global Human Rights Obligations Relevant to AI Governance, International Journal on Minority and Group Rights, V. 28, No. 3, 2021, s. 367–435.
3. ALQODSI, Enas Mohammed/ GURA, Dmityr: High tech and legal challenges: Artificial intelligence-caused damage regulation, Cogent Social Sciences, V. 9, No. 2, 2023.
4. AMATO, Flora/ FIORETTO, Simona/ FORGILLO, Eugenio/ MASCIARI, Elio/ MAZZOCCA, Nicola/ MEROLA, Sabrina/
5. NAPOLITANO, Enea Vincenzo. et al.: Evolving Justice Sector: An Innovative Proposal for Introducing AI-Based Techniques in Court Offices, In Electronic Government and the Information Systems Perspective , Springer, V. 14149, 2023, s. 75–88.
6. BASHAYREH, Mohammad/ SIBAI, Fadi. N / TABBARA, Amer: Artificial intelligence and legal liability: towards an international approach of proportional liability based on risk sharing, Information & Communications Technology Law, V. 30, No. 2, 2021, s. 169–192.
7. BRENNAN, T., Dieterich, SINGH, Jay P; DARYL G Kroner, WORMITH, J. Stephen DESMARAIS, Sarah L and HAMILTON, Zachary: Correctional Offender Management Profiles for Alternative Sanctions (COMPAS), In Handbook of Recidivism Risk/Needs Assessment Tools, John Wiley / Sons, Ltd, 2018, s. 49–75.
8. BROŻEK, Bartosz/ MICHAŁ Furman/ MAREK Jakubiec/ BARTŁOMIEJ Kucharzyk: The black box problem revisited, Real and imaginary challenges for automated legal decision making, Artificial Intelligence and Law, V. 32, No.2, 2024, s. 427–440.

9. BURRI, Thomas: International Law and Artificial Intelligence, German Yearbook of International Law, V. 60, No.1, 2018, s. 91–108.
10. CALDERARO, Andrea/ BLUMFELDE, Stella: Artificial intelligence and EU security: the false promise of digital sovereignty, European Security (London, England), V. 31, No. 3, 2022, s. 415–434.
11. DALY, Stephen: Artificial Intelligence, The Rule of Law And Public Administration: The Case of Taxation, Cambridge Law Journal, V.83, No.3, 2024, 437–464.
12. DANCY, Geoff/ YVONNE Marie Dutton/ TESSA Alleblas/ EAMON Aloyo: What Determines Perceptions of Bias toward the International Criminal Court? Evidence from Kenya, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, V.64, No.(7/8), 2020, s. 1443–1469.
13. DIAS, Stephanie Almeida de Jesus/ RENATO Máximo Sátiro : Artificial intelligence in the judiciary: A critical view, Futures : The Journal of Policy, Planning and Futures Studies, S. 164, 2024, s. 103493.
14. DIXON, Herbert B: Artificial Intelligence and Bias, The Judges’ Journal, V.63, No.1, 2024, s. 37–39.
15. DRUMBL, Mark A: Reimagining Child Soldiers in International Law and Policy (1st ed., pp. xii–xii), Oxford University Press, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199592654.001.0001 European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) (Grand Chamber): Case of Leyla Şahin v. Turkey, International Legal
16. Materials, V. 45, No.2, 2006, s. 436–466. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020782900006252
17. FARID, Assaf: A brief meditation on artificial intelligence, adjudication and the judiciary. Bar News (Sydney, N.S.W.), Summer 2019, s. 10–12.
18. FINE, Anna/ LE, Stephanie / MILLER, Monica K.: Content Analysis of Judges’ Sentiments Toward Artificial Intelligence Risk Assessment Tools, Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law / Society, V.24, No.2, 2023, s. 31–46.
19. FRANGULOIU, Simona: Principles for the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the Judiciary as derived from the European Ethics Charter. Justice Efficiency and Limitations, Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Brașov. Series VII, Social Sciences, Law, 16(Suppl), 2023, s.39–46.
20. GALIANO, Maria Paz Rodriguez.: Facultad de Derecho PUCP, PE, ICC Appeals Court Dismisses Venezuela Effort to Halt Investigations Into Possible Crimes Against Humanity, 2024. https://www.jurist.org/news/2024/03/icc-appeals-court-dismisses-venezuela-effort-to-halt-investigations-into-possible-crimes-against-humanity/
21. GEWIRTZ, Jerry. M.: Artificial Intelligence May Assist, but Can Never Replace, the Judicial Decision-Making Process of Human Judges, The Florida Bar Journal, V.98, No.6, 2024, s. 8.
22. HAGE, Jaap/ WALTERMANN/ Marko Jelicic; Antonia / RAEF David: What Is Wrong with Hungry Judges? A Case Study Roef. of Legal Implications of Cognitive Science, In Law, Science, Rationality. Boom Uitgevers Den Haag, 2019.
23. HOLLISTER, Debra. L./ GONZALEZ, Avelino/ HOLLISTER, James: Contextual Reasoning in Human Cognition and the Implications for Artificial Intelligence Systems, In Modeling and Using Context, V. 10257, Springer International Publishing AG, 2017, s. 599–608. JI, Weidong: The Change of Judicial Power in China in the Era of Artificial Intelligence, Asian Journal of Law and Society, V.7, No.3, 2020, s. 515–530.
24. JOYCE, Daniel: Communications Infrastructure, Technological Solutionism and the International Legal Imagination, Law and Critique, V.34, No.3, 2023, s. 363–379.
25. KAMAL, Baraa Munther / RASHID, Marivan Mustafa : The role of international criminal law in protecting human rights from risks Misuse of artificial intelligence, Journal of STEPS for Humanities and Social Sciences, V.1, No.3, 2022.
26. KANDEEL, Moustafa Elmetwaly / ELREFAE, Galeb: The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Achieving the Efficiency of Justice “AI / Speedy Justice,” 2023 24th International Arab Conference on Information Technology (ACIT), 2023, s. 01–05.
27. KANNAI, Ruith/ SCHILD, Uri, / ZELEZNIKOW, John: Modeling the Evolution of Legal Discretion, An Artificial Intelligence Approach, Ratio Juris, V.20, No.4, 2007, s. 530–558.
28. KAVOLIŪNAITĖ-RAGAUSKIENĖ, Egle : Artificial Intelligence in Manipulation: The Significance and Strategies for Prevention, Baltic Journal of Law / Politics, V.17, No.2, 2024, s. 116–141.
29. KERIKMÄE, Tanel/ HAMUĽÁK, Ondrej, / GÁBRIŠ, Tomáš: Frontiers in AI Judiciary: A Contribution to Legal Futurology, Acta Baltica Historiae et Philosophiae Scientiarum, V.11, No.2, 2023, s. 55–75.
30. KONIAKOU, Vasiliki/ MÄNTYMÄKI, Matti/ DENNEHY, Denis/ GRIVA, Anastasia/ DWIVEDI, Yogesh/ POULOUDI, K Nancy/ PAPPAS, Ilias: Governing Artificial Intelligence and Algorithmic Decision Making: Human Rights and Beyond, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 12896, 2021, s. 173–84.
31. KORNILAKIS, Kornilakis/ ANGELOS, Geōrgios Nouskalēs/ PERGANTİS, Vassilis/ TZİMAS, Themistoklis: Artificial Intelligence and Normative Challenges : International and Comparative Legal Perspectives (1st ed.), Springer International Publishing AG. 2023.
32. KUCINA, Irena: Challenges of Digitalisation in Judicial System, Socrates (Rīga), V.2022, No.2, 2022, s. 51–60.
33. LEE, Jaemin: Artificial Intelligence and International Law (1st ed.), Springer, 2022.
34. MANTELERO, Alessandro: Beyond data : human rights, ethical and social impact assessment in AI Produced and distributed for T.M.C. Asser Press by Springer, 1st Edition 2022, V. 36, 2022.
35. MCLAUGHLIN, Mark: Regulating Artificial Intelligence in International Investment Law, The Journal of World Investment & Trade, V.24, No.2, 2023, s. 256–300.
36. MIREUŢĂ, Samuel: AI and Ethics, The Case Of Refugees. Challenges of the Knowledge Society, V.17, No.1, 2024, s. 305–310.
37. MONIZ LOPES, Pedro/ SILVA SAMPAIO, Jorge / AZEVEDO, Sara.: Editorial - Artificial Intelligence, Legal Theory and the Judiciary, E-Publica (Lisboa), V.11, No.1, 2024.
38. NEPSHA, Oleksiy: Artificial Intelligence As An Innovative Tool Of Corruption Prevention In Judiciary: The Advantages. Publìčne Upravlìnnâ Ta Regìonalʹnij Rozvitok, 25, 2024, s. 960–988.
39. NISHANT, Rohit/ SCHNECKENBERG, Dirk / RAVISHANKAR, MN: The formal rationality of artificial intelligence-based algorithms and the problem of bias, Journal of Information Technology, V.39, No.1, 2024, s. 19–40.
40. NGIGE, Ogochukwu Constance/ AWODELE, Oludele/ BALOGUN, Oluwatobi: Judicial Artificial Intelligence Bias: A Survey and Recommendations, Transactions on Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence, V.9, No.2, 2021, s. 74–86.
41. OLIVEIRA, Manuel/ BRANDS, Justus/ MASHUDI, Judith ; LIEFOOGHE, Baptist/ HORTENSIUS, Ruud: Perceptions of artificial intelligence system’s aptitude to judge morality and competence amidst the rise of Chatbots, Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, V.9, No.1, 2024, s. 47–20.
42. PAGALLO, Ugo/ BASSI, Eleneora., / DURANTE, Massimo: The Normative Challenges of AI in Outer Space: Law, Ethics, and the Realignment of Terrestrial Standards, Philosophy / Technology, V.36, No.2, 2023, s. 23. RAI, Arun: Explainable AI: from black box to glass box, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, V.48, No.1, 2020, s. 137–141.
43. RAST, Claduia : Cybersecurity Threats to the Judiciary, The Judges’ Journal, V.62, No.3, 2023, s. 16–19.
44. RENAN BARZILAY, Arianne: The Technologies of Discrimination: How Platforms Cultivate Gender Inequality, Law / Ethics of Human Rights, V.13, No.2, 2019, s. 179–202.
45. ROBERTS, Huw / COWLS, Josh / MORLEY, Jessica / TADDEO, Mariarosaria / WANG, Vincent / FLORIDI, Luciano: The Chinese approach to artificial intelligence: an analysis of policy, ethics, and regulation, AI / Society, V.36, No.1, 2021, s. 59–77.
46. SANGCHUL Park: Bridging the global divide in AI regulation: A proposal for a contextual, coherent, and commensurable framework, Washington International Law Journal, V.33, No.2, 2024, s. 216–269.
47. SEGEV, Re’em: Artificial Intelligence, Discrimination, Fairness, and Other Moral Concerns, Minds and Machines (Dordrecht), V.34, No.4, 2024.
48. STERN, Rachel E / LIEBMAN, Benjamin L/ROBERTS, Margaret E/ WANG, Alice Z: Automating Fairness? Artificial Intelligence in the Chinese Courts, The Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, V.59, N.3, 2021, s. 515.
49. SOCOL DE LA OSA, David Uriel / REMOLINA, Nydia: Artificial intelligence at the bench: Legal and ethical challenges of informing—or misinforming—judicial decision-making through generative AI, Data & Policy, 6, 2024.
50. SROKA, T., Kapelańska-Pręgowska, J., / Balcerzak, M.: Artificial intelligence and the right to a fair trial, In Artificial Intelligence and International Human Rights La, 2024, s. 250–277, Edward Elgar Publishing.
51. TEITEL, Ruti : Toward a Theory of Transitional Justice, In Transitional Justice, Oxford University Press, 2001 Translated ContentEngine LLC. Delcy Rodriguez accused the International Criminal Court of having “a political bias.” In CE Noticias Financieras (English ed.), ContentEngine LLC, a Florida limited liability company, 2021.
52. T.C. Strateji ve Bütçe Başkanlığı: Cumhurbaşkanlığı Yıllık Programı, 2025, https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/2025-Yili-Cumhurbaskanligi-Yillik-Programi-05112024.pdf
53. USA Law Library of Congress: Global Legal Research Directorate issuing body, Regulation of artificial intelligence in selected jurisdictions, The Law Library of Congress, Global Legal Research Directorate, 2019.
54. ULENAERS, Jasper: The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on the Right to a Fair Trial: Towards a Robot Judge? Asian Journal of Law and Economics, V.11, No.2, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1515/ajle-2020-0008
55. VAN BERKEL, Niels/ TAG, Benjamin / GONCALVES, Jorge/ HOSIO, Simo: Human-centred artificial intelligence: a contextual morality perspective, Behaviour / Information Technology, V.41, No.3, 2022, s. 502–518.
56. VECELLIO SEGATE, Riccardo: Cognitive Bias, Privacy Rights, and Digital Evidence in International Criminal Proceedings: Demystifying the Double-Edged ai Revolution. International Criminal Law Review, V.21, No.2, 2021, s. 242–279.
57. VO, Ace / PLACHKINOVA, Miloslova: Investigating the role of artificial intelligence in the US criminal justice system, Journal of Information, Communication / Ethics in Society (Online), V.21, No.4, 2023, s. 550–567.
58. WEBER, Michael/ ENGERT, Martin/ SCHAFFER, JÖRG WEKING, Norman/ KRCMAR, Helmut: Organizational Capabilities for AI Implementation—Coping with Inscrutability and Data Dependency in AI. Information Systems Frontiers, V.25, No.4, 2023, s. 1549–1569.
59. WIECZOREK, Krzysztof: The Conscience of a Machine? Artificial Intelligence and the Problem of Moral Responsibility, Er(r)Go (Katowice), V.1, No.42, 2021, s. 15–34.
60. WANG, Nyu, / Tian, Michael Yuan: “Intelligent Justice”: human-centered considerations in China’s legal AI transformation, Ai and Ethics (Online), V.3, No.(2, 2023, s. 349–354.
61. XU, Zichun: The Legitimacy of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Decision Making: Chinese Experience, International Journal of Technoethics, V.13, No.2, 2022, s. 1–17.
62. YU, Ronald/ ALÌ, Gabriella Spina: What’s Inside the Black Box? AI Challenges for Lawyers and Researchers, Legal Information Management, V.19, No.1, 2019, s. 2–13.
63. ZAVHORODNIA, V., Slavko, A., Shvaher, O., Kamionka, M., Cojocari, I., / Polyakova, L: Artificial intelligence in the judiciary: challenges and tools for achieving sustainable development goals, International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, V.21, No.2–4, 2022, s. 322–342.
64. ZAVRŠNIK, Aleš: Criminal justice, artificial intelligence systems, and human rights, ERA-Forum, V.20, No.4, 2020, s. 567–583. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-020-00602-0
65. Uluslararası Belgeler
66. European Commission: Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology, Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI, Publications Office, 2019, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2759/346720
67. European Commission. Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council: Laying Down Harmonised Rules on Artificial Intelligence (Artifıcial Intelligence Act) and Amending Certain Union Legislative Acts, 2021/0106 (COD).
68. Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence, OECD/LEGAL/0449 https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-044, Compendium of Legal Instruments of the OECD, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org
69. The European Parliement Artificial Intelligence Act, 2024, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/698792/EPRS_BRI(2021)698792_EN.pdf
70. International Court of Justice: Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons - Declarations and Separate Opinions Not Reproduced at 35 I.L.M. 809 (1996). International Legal Materials, V. 35, No.6, 1996, s. 1343–1358. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020782900024049