The Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Judicial System of Pakistan: Prospects and Challenges

Author: Muhammad Farhan Azhar, Dr. Naeem Ullah Khan

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is no longer a distant technological idea for courts; it is becoming a practical instrument for legal research, case management, document review, scheduling, data analysis and access to justice. Pakistan’s judiciary faces chronic delay, heavy backlog, paper-based processes, uneven digital infrastructure and barriers for ordinary litigants. These weaknesses affect not only administrative efficiency but also the constitutional promise of fair trial, dignity, privacy and inexpensive justice. This article examines the role of AI in Pakistan’s judicial system through a doctrinal, analytical and comparative legal approach. It argues that AI can improve judicial efficiency by supporting legal research, drafting assistance, evidence organization, automated causelist management, case-flow analytics and litigant information services. However, AI also creates serious risks: algorithmic bias, black-box reasoning, hallucinated legal output, data misuse, surveillance, automation bias, digital exclusion and uncertainty over accountability. The recent judicial and policy developments in Pakistan, including recognition of AI as an auxiliary judicial tool and national guidelines for AI in judicial institutions, provide an important starting point. Yet policy guidance alone is insufficient unless supported by enforceable rules, data protection safeguards, judicial training, independent audits and human oversight. The article concludes that Pakistan should adopt AI gradually, beginning with administrative and low-risk functions, while preserving the judge as the final constitutional decision-maker.

Keywords

Artificial Intelligence, Judiciary, Pakistan, Access to Justice, Algorithmic Bias, Human Oversight, Judicial Reform.

References

Angwin, J., Larson, J., Mattu, S., & Kirchner, L. (2016, May 23). Machine bias. ProPublica.
https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing
Barocas, S., Hardt, M., & Narayanan, A. (2023). Fairness and machine learning: Limitations and
opportunities. MIT Press.
Cappelletti, M., & Garth, B. (1978). Access to justice: The worldwide movement to make rights
effective. Sijthoff & Noordhoff.
Citron, D. K. (2008). Technological due process. Washington University Law Review, 85(6), 1249–
1313.
Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (1973).
Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor.
St. Martin’s Press.
European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice. (2018). European ethical charter on the use of
artificial intelligence in judicial systems and their environment. Council of Europe.
European Union. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence. Official Journal of the
European Union.
Farid, S., & Ghazanfar, M. (2025). AI, automation, and Pakistan’s judiciary: Mapping the ethical and
legal boundaries of algorithmic justice. Advance Social Science Archive Journal, 4(1), 4176–
4188.
Gondal, A. Q., Ahmad, M., & Hatta, Z. (2025). Revolutionizing criminal justice: The role of
digitalization and AI in Pakistan’s legal system. Al Khadim Research Journal of Islamic Culture
and Civilization, 6(1), 25–35.
Hashmi, H. (2025). The use of artificial intelligence in courts for timely judgements. Islamabad Policy
Research Institute.
Imam, M. J., & Ahmed, S. S. (2025). The role of generative artificial intelligence in judicial decisionmaking process. UCP Journal of Law & Legal Education, 3(1), 112–137.
Ishfaq Ahmed v. Mushtaq Ahmed, 2025 SCP 112.
Law & Justice Commission of Pakistan. (2024). 3rd bi-annual report of judicial statistics. Law &
Justice Commission of Pakistan.
Mata v. Avianca, Inc., No. 22-cv-1461 (S.D.N.Y. 2023).
Ministry of Information Technology and Telecommunication. (2025). National Artificial Intelligence
Policy 2025. Government of Pakistan.
National Judicial Policy Making Committee. (2026). National guidelines for use of artificial
intelligence in judicial institutions of Pakistan. Law & Justice Commission of Pakistan.
NITI Aayog. (2018). National strategy for artificial intelligence: #AIforAll. Government of India.
O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens
democracy. Crown.
OECD. (2019). Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence. OECD Legal Instruments.
Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information.
Harvard University Press.
Personal Data Protection Bill (2023) (Pakistan).
Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (2016) (Pakistan).
Qureshi, H. I. A., Rizvi, A., & Wattoo, M. R. (2024). The role of AI systems in judiciary and its
implication on society. Pakistan Journal of Law, Analysis and Wisdom, 3(5), 149–165.
Saeed, K., Arif, I., Hassan, M., Younis, M., Anwar, E., Masood, A., Saeed, Y., & Khan, A. (2025).
Artificial intelligence and its role in promoting human rights: Legal frameworks and challenges
in Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences Review, 4(5), 272–291.
Sehar, K., Rehman, T. U., & Ijaz, S. (2025). Role of AI in the judicial process. Journal of Political
Stability Archive, 3(4), 271–281.
Shafiq, J., Shafiq, H. M. S., & Sarwar, M. S. (2022). Use of ICTs and artificial intelligence to
overcome judicial trial delays in Pakistani courts. Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review,
6(2), 1153–1163.
Shah, G., Ali, Z., & Tahir, M. (2025). Artificial intelligence integration in Pakistan’s legal system:
Enhancing access to justice, judicial transparency, and legal efficiency. Federal Law Journal,
4(1), 87–101.
Singapore Judiciary. (2024). Technology and innovation in the Singapore courts.
https://www.judiciary.gov.sg
Sourdin, T. (2018). Judge v robot? Artificial intelligence and judicial decision-making. University of
New South Wales Law Journal, 41(4), 1114–1133.
State v. Loomis, 881 N.W.2d 749 (Wis. 2016).
Supreme Court of India. (2021). Supreme Court Portal for Assistance in Court Efficiency (SUPACE).
Supreme Court of India.
Surden, H. (2019). Artificial intelligence and law: An overview. Georgia State University Law
Review, 35(4), 1305–1337.
Susskind, R. (2019). Online courts and the future of justice. Oxford University Press.
UNESCO. (2021). Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

DOI: 10.52279/jlss.08.02.261268 | 261-268  |  PDF