Justice BR Gavai, a judge of the Supreme Court of India, has raised serious concerns about the misuse of live-streamed court hearings by content creators. He pointed out that many content creators, particularly YouTubers, take short clips from court proceedings, often distorting the context to create sensationalized narratives. This, he warned, leads to misinformation and misinterpretation of judicial discussions.
Speaking at a conference organized by the Supreme Court of Kenya, Justice Gavai discussed the Indian judiciary’s transition to virtual hearings and live-streaming of court proceedings. While this has enhanced public access to justice and increased transparency, it has also introduced challenges that need immediate attention.
"Short clips from court hearings are often circulated on social media, sometimes in a way that sensationalizes the proceedings. These clips, when taken out of context, can lead to misinformation, misinterpretation of judicial discussions, and inaccurate reporting."
One of the major issues he highlighted is the question of intellectual property rights and the ownership of judicial recordings. Many content creators extract, edit, and re-upload parts of live-streamed hearings as their own content. This not only raises ethical concerns but also has legal implications regarding the unauthorized use and potential monetization of judicial proceedings.
"Additionally, many content creators, including YouTubers, re-upload short excerpts from court proceedings as their own content, raising serious questions about intellectual property rights and ownership of judicial recordings. The unauthorized use and potential monetization of such content blur the lines between public access and ethical broadcasting."
Read Also:- Supreme Court Justice BR Gavai Warns Against Over-Reliance on AI in Judiciary
Justice Gavai emphasized the need for courts to establish clear guidelines on how live-streamed proceedings should be used. He stressed that while transparency is essential, it must be balanced with ethical considerations to prevent the spread of misleading content.
"Managing these challenges is an emerging issue for the judiciary. Courts may need to establish clear guidelines on the usage of live-streamed proceedings. Striking a balance between transparency, public awareness, and the responsible use of court content will be critical in addressing these ethical concerns."
Challenges Posed by Artificial Intelligence in the Judiciary
Justice Gavai also addressed the growing role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the judiciary. While AI-based tools have been beneficial for case management, scheduling, and legal research, he warned about the risks associated with relying on AI for legal analysis and judicial predictions.
One major issue is the generation of fake case citations and fabricated legal facts by AI tools such as ChatGPT. Justice Gavai pointed out that while AI can process vast amounts of legal data quickly, it lacks the human ability to verify the authenticity of sources, which can lead to serious consequences.
"Relying on AI for legal research comes with significant risks, as there have been instances where platforms like ChatGPT have generated fake case citations and fabricated legal facts. While AI can process vast amounts of legal data and provide quick summaries, it lacks the ability to verify sources with human-level discernment. This has led to situations where lawyers and researchers, trusting AI-generated information, have unknowingly cited non-existent cases or misleading legal precedents, resulting in professional embarrassment and potential legal consequences."
Another key concern he raised was the use of AI to predict judicial outcomes. While AI-driven predictive models may seem promising, they raise fundamental questions about the nature of justice and the role of human judgment in the legal system.
"Furthermore, AI is increasingly being explored as a tool to predict court outcomes, sparking important debates about its role in judicial decision-making. This raises fundamental questions about the very nature of justice. Can a machine, lacking human emotions and moral reasoning, truly grasp the complexities and nuances of legal disputes? The essence of justice often involves ethical considerations, empathy, and contextual understanding—elements that remain beyond the reach of algorithms. The integration of AI in the judiciary, therefore, must be approached with caution, ensuring that technology serves as an aid rather than a replacement for human judgment."
Read Also:- Supreme Court Orders States/UTs to Notify and Appoint Special Educators for Children with Special Needs
Need for Ethical Guidelines and Responsible Use of Technology
Justice Gavai’s remarks highlight the urgent need for a structured approach to managing both the misuse of live-streamed court proceedings and the ethical challenges of AI in legal research. While technological advancements can enhance efficiency and accessibility, they must be implemented with caution to uphold the integrity of the judicial system.
The judiciary must strike a balance between transparency and responsible content usage. Similarly, AI should serve as an assisting tool rather than replacing human judgment in legal matters. With proper guidelines and ethical considerations in place, the legal system can leverage technology while preserving the fundamental principles of justice.
