In an era where digital transformation is accelerating at an unprecedented rate and artificial intelligence (AI) is penetrating every sector, a fundamental question arises:
How can we leverage this transformative power to advance our legal and judicial systems while safeguarding the principles of justice and integrity?

 

Recent global developments — from the UAE’s pioneering initiative to draft legislation using AI, to strict judicial warnings in the United Kingdom and Singapore regarding the irresponsible use of such technologies — are shaping a future that demands Jordan to formulate clear legal frameworks. These frameworks must ensure optimal utilization of AI while minimizing its associated risks.

 

The United Arab Emirates has launched the first comprehensive smart legislative system based on AI. This bold initiative not only aims to accelerate the legislative cycle by up to 70 per cent but also aspires to build a governance model that blends human intelligence with AI efficiency. This forward-looking approach reflects a vision of AI as more than just a support tool — it positions AI as an active partner in legal drafting. The result is a more efficient judicial system, an attractive investment environment, and a dynamic legal infrastructure.

 

In contrast, the British judiciary has issued stern warnings against the use of fake legal citations generated by AI. Clear penalties were announced for violators, sending a strong message: this is not merely a procedural concern, but an alarm bell demanding deep reflection on the risks of uncritical AI use. Crossing the lines of accuracy, objectivity, and neutrality threatens not only the reputation of legal professionals but also the credibility of entire judicial systems built on trust and scrutiny.

 

Striking a more balanced approach, the Supreme Court of Singapore issued a landmark guidance on September 23, 2024, regarding the use of AI in court proceedings. The guide, now in effect, allows the use of AI tools — but within strict legal and ethical boundaries. It emphasizes that users are fully responsible for any content submitted, including its accuracy, reliability, and impartiality. Furthermore, the guide prohibits the use of AI to generate or falsify evidence and bans the sharing of personal or confidential data that could be stored by these systems. These principles place human oversight at the heart of review and verification, offering a model worth adopting in Jordan.

 

Given these developments, Jordan must build an advanced legal framework and adopt a national AI strategy to become a regional leader in the responsible use of AI in legal and judicial fields. This transformation requires well-defined legal and regulatory controls that ensure safe and effective integration.

 

Based on this, the following key recommendations are proposed: Jordan should institutionalize the concept of “ratification” for any legal or judicial document produced by AI. Such documents should only be validated after human review and approval by qualified legal experts (lawyers, judges, legislators) who bear full legal responsibility for the content.

 

Furthermore, a specialized regulatory body should be created to supervise the use of AI in legal and judicial systems. Its duties would include setting standards, issuing licenses, ensuring compliance with legal and ethical rules, and investigating potential violations or errors caused by AI tools.

 

Also, Clear guidelines must be developed to guarantee that the data used to train AI models is accurate, unbiased, and current. There should also be a push for greater transparency in how AI algorithms operate — to avoid the problem of the “black box” and to help users understand how outputs are generated.

 

In the same token, to ensure effective use of these systems, it is essential to train and equip legal and judicial professionals. Tailored training programs should be developed, focusing on how AI works, how to verify its outputs, how to detect risks, and how to effectively interact with “digital legal assistants.”

 

Hence, Jordan should actively participate in international forums concerned with the ethical governance of AI in the legal field. Drawing on experiences like those of the UAE and Singapore can help shape a national legal model aligned with global best practices.

 

Adopting AI in Jordan’s legal system is not just a matter of modernization — it is a strategic necessity to keep pace with global trends and achieve faster, more efficient justice. But this transformation must be implemented with caution and accountability.

 

The future will belong to those who understand that AI is not a replacement for human wisdom or professional integrity, but rather a magnifying lens — one that reveals gaps and opportunities we might otherwise overlook. In this way, lawmaking remains a fundamentally human task, even when supported by non-human tools.

 

So, are we ready to break barriers and build bridges — between the wisdom of law and the intelligence of the future?