Judgment

Judgment

Artificial Intelligence as an Official Judicial Expert

Document Type : Scientific

Authors
Muhammad Rasool Ahangaran 1
Jamaladin Naseri 2
1 استاد گروه فقه و مبانی حقوق اسلامی، دانشگاه تهران، دانشکدگان فارابی، قم، ایران، رایانامه: ahangaran@ut.ac.ir
2 MA Graduate in Regional Studies (North Africa), Official Judiciary Expert, Qom, Iran; Jamal.naseri.425@gmail.com
10.22034/judg.2025.2055221.1390
Abstract
With the remarkable advancements in artificial intelligence in recent decades and the emergence of its novel applications in judicial systems, the question arises as to whether artificial intelligence can replace official judicial experts. This article, with an analytical-descriptive approach, examines the possibility of using artificial intelligence as an official judicial expert in our country's judicial system. By analyzing the capabilities and limitations of artificial intelligence in the role of an official expert, the article demonstrates that while AI-based technologies are capable of processing big data, providing objective analyses, and accelerating repetitive processes, serious limitations prevent this complete replacement. Limitations such as legal accountability for algorithmic errors, inability to understand the socio-cultural complexities of cases, biases stemming from training data, and a lack of transparency in decision-making are among the main obstacles. The findings indicate that artificial intelligence in its current state lacks the necessary competence to play an independent expert role. However, as a complementary tool alongside official experts, it can contribute to enhancing the quality of judicial services by automating routine tasks and increasing the accuracy and speed of proceedings. Realizing artificial intelligence as an official judicial expert requires the development of legal and ethical frameworks, investment in infrastructure, training of human resources, and the strengthening of collaboration among technology, engineering, and legal professionals so that replacing official experts with artificial intelligence can be achieved while preserving justice and public trust.
Keywords
Artificial Intelligence
Expert AI
Judicial Automation
Automated Decision-Making
Efficient Judicial System
Subjects

  1. 1.         ناصری، جمال‌الدین. (1399). یکپارچه‌سازی نهادهای کارشناسی؛ یک ضرورت فوری، فصلنامۀ قضاوت، شمارۀ 104.

    1. AI Research Center in Law Report. (2023). Automation of Routine Judicial Tasks with Artificial Intelligence, Research Report No. 2023-12.
    2. Artificial Intelligence Ethics Committee. (2023). Ethical principles of artificial intelligence in legal systems. Report of the Specialized Committee on AI Ethics.
    3. Casillas, J. (2023). “Bias and discrimination in machine decision-making systems, In F. Lara and J. Deckers (Eds.)”, Ethics of artificial intelligence, p.p. 13-38.
    4. Chaudhary, G. (2023). “Explainable Artificial Intelligence (xAI): Reflections on Judicial System”, Kutafin Law Review, Vol. 10, No. 4, p.p. 872–889.
    5. Clark, R., Brown, J., and Smith, K. (2020). Application of Machine Vision in Criminology, Elsevier Publishing.
    6. Dixon, H. B. (2024). “Artificial Intelligence and Bias”, Judges’ Journal, Vol. 63, No, 1, p.p. 37-39.
    7. Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence (GPAI). (2021). Annual report 2021. Paris: GPAI Secretariat.
    8. Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y., and Courville, A. (2016). Deep Learning. MIT Press.
    9. Hamilton, M. (2023). “A ‘black box’ AI system has been influencing criminal justice decisions for over two decades – it’s time to open it up”, https://theconversation.com.
    10. Johnson, A., and Lee, B. (2022). “Operational challenges in AI deployment: A comprehensive review”, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, Vol. 75, No. 2, p.p. 20-35.
    11. Kaal, W. (2025). “Artificial Intelligence: The Final Frontier”, International Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, Vol. 5, No. 1, p.p. 1-21.
    12. Kaoma, S. C., and Halubanza, B. (2024). “Utilizing Machine Learning for Accurate Property Valuation: A Regression Model Analysis”, Zambia Information Communication Technology (ICT) Journal, Vol. 8, No. 1, p.p. 34-46.
    13. Kesari, A., Sele, D., Ash, E., and Bechtold, S. (2024). “A Legal Framework for eXplainable Artificial Intelligence”, Center for Law and Economics, ETH Zurich, p.p. 1-46.
    14. Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., and Hinton, G. E. (2012). “ImageNet Classification with Deep Convolutional Neural Networks”, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Vol. 25, p.p. 1097-1105.
    15. Laux, J. (2023). “Institutionalised distrust and human oversight of artificial intelligence: Toward a democratic design of AI governance under the European Union AI Act”, Oxford Internet Institute, p.p. 1-25.
    16. LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., and Hinton, G. (2015). “Deep learning, Nature”, 521(7553), p.p. 436-444.
    17. Legal Research Institute. (2023). Application of Natural Language Processing in Legal Text Analysis, Research Report No. 2023-10.
    18. Li, W., and Chen, H. (2023). “Detecting financial fraud using machine learning”, Journal of Accounting and Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 12, No. 4, p.p. 70-90.
    19. Ling, E. C., Tussyadiah, I., Liu, A., and Stienmetz, J. (2025). “Perceived intelligence of artificially intelligent assistants for travel: Scale development and validation”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 64, No. 2, p.p. 299-321.
Judgment
Volume 26, Issue 126
Summer 2026
Pages 152-177

  • Receive Date 06 March 2025
  • Revise Date 21 August 2025
  • Accept Date 01 October 2025