THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE COURTS OF CHINA AND PORTUGAL: IMPACTS OF GENERATIVE AI ON JUDICIAL DECISION-MAKING

Abstract

In contemporary society, most activities are carried out using technological tools. Among these, Artificial Intelligence has advanced and contributed to a wide range of activities and procedures. It is present in the daily operations of the Judiciary, where, despite being a reality, it is still far from provoking heated debates aimed at extracting the greatest number of benefits while anticipating, minimizing, or eliminating potential harms that may arise.This article aims to analyze how Generative Artificial Intelligence has been used in the courts of China and Portugal, specifically concerning the care taken with the quality of judicial decisions. The objective is to examine how these courts seek to prevent the use of generative AI from contributing to a degenerative judiciary.Although Artificial Intelligence is a reality in the courts of China and Portugal, as well as throughout the world, this study seeks to verify how generative AI—whose use was intensified by the Covid-19 pandemic—has been consolidated as a tool capable of reducing the working hours required to resolve a given legal dispute, while also focusing on the quality of this work so that it becomes a recognized and valuable practice.On the other hand, although the advantages of employing AI in courts are indisputable, the existence of risks is also acknowledged. These risks may compromise the very court that employs it, as occurs, for instance, in so-called “hallucinations,” which produce decisions disconnected from the facts of the case, or from the applicable laws and precedents.The goal is to correlate the realities of the Chinese and Portuguese courts to examine how the issue of using Generative AI and its possible “hallucinations” is being addressed in each of these countries. How is an AI-generated decision treated in China? And in Portugal?The intention, albeit in an initial manner, is to observe how generative AI has been becoming a reality in the daily activities of Chinese and Portuguese courts. The East and the West use the same tool, but do they use it in the same way? The methodology employed is bibliographic, based on research from books, news reports, and scientific articles. It is qualitative and interpretative. There is no intention to exhaust the subject—which is known to be humanly impossible—but rather to reflect on the impact of possible errors or hallucinations on the judiciary of these countries. The relevance of the topic is demonstrated by the impact of decisions arising from the use of Artificial Intelligence.