While Malaysia is examining the sentence of the AI ​​court, some lawyers are afraid for justice

Stock photo | Pictures of Viblock from Pixabay

Hamid shuffled several cases against IsmFromNearly two decades later as a lawyer, however, he was shocked when he defended a man he had been convicted of using artificial intelligence. Malaysian Sabah State.

IsmFromI knew The courtS. Sabah and neighbor Sarawa were examining Per Tool for Punishment Recommended as part of a nationwide pilot, but the technology was uncomfortable being used before LawyerThe judges and the public understand this perfectly.

There was no proper advice on the use of technology and it is not even considered in the country’s penal code, he saidFromd

“Our Criminal Procedure Code does not provide for use Per In The courts… I think it’s unconstitutional, ”sFromd IsmFroml, adds that Per-The recommended punishment for his client for possession of a minor drug was extremely severe.

The The courtThe pilot software for Sabah and Sarawak was developed by Sarawak Information Systems, a state government agency whichFromd At the time it discussed the process, and took steps to resolve it Something Anxiety rFromBut

Worldwide, use Per In the criminal Judgment The system is growing rapidly, with popular DoNotPay chatbot lawyers judging robot judges in Estonia, starting with the mobile app.Fromms, to Canadian robot intermediaries and Per Judges in Chinese The courts

Authorities say PerBuilds-based systems Punishment Can clear case backlogs more consistently and quickly and cheaply, helping all parties in the legal process to avoid long, costly and stressful cases.

In a global survey by research firm Gartner last year, more than a third of government respondents indicated they planned to increase investment. Per– Powered system including chatbot, facial recognition and data mining across the sector.

This month, Malaysian Federal authorities FromTo end their nationwide trial Per Punishment Tools, which they have sFromd “can improve the quality of justice”, although it is not entirely clear how they will be used. The courts

Its a spokesperson MalaysiaIts chief Judgment sFromd use Per Inside The courts was “still in the trial stage”, declined further comment.

BIAS, mild cause

Critics have warned Per Risk entrenching and amplifying bias agFromMinority and marginalized groups say technology lacks the ability for judges to consider personal circumstances or adapt to changing social behavior.

“Inside Punishment, Judges not only look at the facts of the case – they also consider the reasons for the reduction and use their discretion. But Per Can’t use prudence, “IsmFromI told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

Considering the growing and mitigating factors “a human mind needs”, sFromd Charles Hector Fernandez, a Malaysian Human rights lawyer.

“Sentences also change with the passage of time and with the change of public opinion. We need more judges and prosecutors to deal with the growing pressure of cases; Per The judge of the people cannot replace, ”he added.

This is what I want to address concerns Per Software may be biased PunishmentSarawak Information System S.Fromd This has removed the “race” variable from the algorithm.

But although “such mitigation measures are valuable, they do not make the system perfect”FromDa 2020 report on tools from the Treasury Research Institute (KRI), a policy think-tank.

It further mentioned that the company used only five-year datasets from 2014-19 to trFromn algorithm, “which seems SomethingWhich is limited compared to the extensive databases used in global efforts. “

Could not be reached for comment on whether it has expanded its database with Sarawak Information Systems.

An analysis of the KRI in Sabah and Sarawak found that the judges followed suit Per Punishment Recommendations in one-third of cases, all of which involve rape or drug possession on the condition of two state pilots.

Something Judges have reduced the proposed sentence in light of the soothing reason. Others were hardened on the grounds that they would not act as “strong enough resistance.”

‘Opaque Algorithm’

Criminals have the potential to improve their skills in technology Judgment System, sFromd Simon Chesterman, Professor of Law at the National University of Singapore.

But its validity depends not only on the accuracy of the decisions, but also on the way they are made, he added.

“Many decisions can be handed over to the machine properly. (But) the judgment of a judge should not be outsourced to opaque algorithms, ”S.FromDe Chesterman, a senior director Per Singapore, a government program.

Which is represented by the Bar Council of Malaysia LawyerHe also expressed concern in this regard Per Aviator.

When The courts began using it in mid-2021 in the capital Kuala Lumpur Punishment Council s in 20 types of offensesFromd It was “not given maximum guidance, and we had no chance to get feedback from criminal law practitioners”.

Sabah, IsmFromI have appealed his client’s sentencing recommendation Per Tool, which the judge followed.

But he sFromd Lots Lawyer Don’t mount a challenge – potentially condemning their clients in too harsh a sentence.

“The Per He works like a senior judge, ”Ism saidFromlsFromd

“Young magistrates may think this is the best decision, and they can accept it without question.” – Reuters

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.