ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN JUDICIAL MANAGEMENT: APPLICATIONS, ETHICS, RISKS AND A POLISH PERSPECTIVE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/EiP.2026.16Keywords
AI, judicial management, ethics, risk, PolandAbstract
Motivation: The integration of AI into judicial systems is rapidly transforming court administration, case management, and decision support. While these innovations promise efficiency gains and improved access to justice, they also introduce complex ethical, governance, and institutional risk challenges that appear to remain underexplored, particularly in Poland’s transitional judiciary.
Aim: This systematic literature review examines global and Polish-focused scholarship to identify gaps in current research and synthesise major themes in AI applications for judicial management. It aims to provide a high-level overview of international developments and regulatory frameworks at the global and EU levels. It explores associated ethical and legal considerations as well as implementation risks. Finally, the review looks into best practices and potential pitfalls of AI deployment in courts.
Results: Three overarching themes emerge. First, AI applications in judicial management encompass automated case triage, predictive analytics for sentencing, and document and workflow automation. Second, ethical and governance considerations focus on such areas as transparency and explainability, algorithmic bias mitigation, and accountability frameworks that preserve human oversight. Third, institutional risks include data privacy vulnerabilities, unclear liability and regulatory gaps, and capacity constraints within court infrastructures. Across these themes, the Polish context highlights barriers such as limited digital infrastructure, evolving legal frameworks, and the need for specialised training of judicial personnel.
References
Alves, A., Miranda, P. B. C., & Mello, F. (2023). Automatic simplification of legal texts in Portuguese using natural language processing. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, 351. https://doi.org/10.3233/FAIA230975.
de la Osa, D. U. S., & Remolina, N. (2024). Artificial intelligence at the bench: Legal and ethical challenges. DATA & POLICY, 6. https://doi.org/10.1017/dap.2024.53.
Dolniak, P., Kuźma, T., Ludwiński, A., & Wasik, K. (2024). Sztuczna inteligencja w wymiarze sprawiedliwości. Między prawem a algorytmami. Wolters Kluwer.
European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). (2018). European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Systems and their Environment. Retrieved 19.10.2025 from https://rm.coe.int/ethical-charter-en-for-publication-4-december-2018/16808f699c.
Farzammehr, M. A., Tabrizi, E., & al. (2024). Using machine learning to predict performance in court case management. Journal of Statistical Research, 58(2). https://doi.org/10.3329/jsr.v58i2.80626.
Federal Court of Canada. (2025). Interim Principles and Guidelines on the Court's Use of Artificial Intelligence. Retrieved 19.10.2025 from https://www.fct-cf.ca/en/pages/law-and-practice/artificial-intelligence.
Florez Rojas, M. L. R. (2025). Algocracy in the Judiciary: Challenging Trust and Transparency. Revista de Estudios Sociales, 93, 61-75. https://doi.org/10.7440/res93.2025.06.
Gdańsk University of Technology. (2024). Technology to revolutionize the work of Polish courts is developed at Gdańsk Tech. Retrieved 19.10.2025 from https://pg.edu.pl/en/news/2024-11/technology-revolutionize-work-polish-courts-developed-gdansk-tech.
Guitton, C., Druta, V., & Hinterleitner, M. (2025). Adoption of artificial intelligence in the judiciary: current trends and future prospects. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-025-00311-y.
International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO). (2023). ISO/IEC 23894:2023 Information technology - Artificial intelligence - Risk management. Retrieved 19.10.2025 from https://www.iso.org/standard/77304.html.
Joshi, G., Tasgaonkar, V., & Deshpande, N. (2025). Multimodal machine learning for deception detection in courtroom settings. Scientific Reports, 15, Article 92399. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-92399-6.
Judiciary of England and Wales. (2025). Refreshed AI Guidance published version. Retrieved 19.10.2025 from https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Refreshed-AI-Guidance-published-version-website-version.pdf.
Kowalski, M. (2025). Artificial intelligence and the improvement of judicial efficiency. Prawo i Więź, 54, 429-437. https://doi.org/10.36128/PRIW.VI54.1161.
Kvasnica, P. (2025). Unstructured documents processing through anonymization. Journal of Electrical Engineering, 76(4). https://doi.org/10.2478/jee-2025-0028.
Ministerstwo Cyfryzacji. (2024). Podsumowanie konsultacji publicznych dot. projektu ustawy o systemach AI. Retrieved 19.10.2025 from https://www.gov.pl/web/cyfryzacja/podsumowanie-konsultacji-spolecznych-projektu-polityki-rozwoju-sztucznej-inteligencji-do-2030-r.
Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości. (2025a). Cyfrowy Sąd - śniadanie prasowe Ministra Sprawiedliwości [Prezentacja]. Retrieved 19.10.2025 from https://www.gov.pl/attachment/4d0d6beb-5e87-4ff1-ad1b-672036d63769.
Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości. (2025b). Program “Cyfrowy Sąd” zmieni wymiar sprawiedliwości. Retrieved 19.10.2025 from https://www.gov.pl/web/sprawiedliwosc/program-cyfrowy-sad-zmieni-wymiar-sprawiedliwosci.
Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości. (2024). Raport z badania oczekiwań w zakresie automatyzacji pracy w systemach teleinformatycznych w sądach. Retrieved 20.10.2025 from https://www.si-dla-sprawiedliwosci.gov.pl/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/MS-raport-z-badania-oczekiwan-w-zakresie-automatyzacji-pracy-w-systemach-teleinformatycznych-w-sadach.pdf.
Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości & Ministerstwo Cyfryzacji. (2025). Cyfrowa transformacja wymiaru sprawiedliwości wchodzi w nowy etap. Retrieved 19.10.2025 from https://www.gov.pl/web/sprawiedliwosc/cyfrowa-transformacja-wymiaru-sprawiedliwosci-wchodzi-w-nowy-etap.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). (2023). Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework. Retrieved 19.10.2025 from https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2019). OECD AI Principles. Retrieved 19.10.2025 from https://www.oecd.org/going-digital/ai/principles/.
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on adapting non-contractual civil liability rules to artificial intelligence [AI Liability Directive] (COM(2022) 496 final) (EU).
Reiling, D., & Contini, F. M. (2022). E-Justice Platforms: Challenges for Judicial Governance. International Journal for Court Administration, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.36745/ijca.445.
Regulation (EU) 2022/868 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2022 on European data governance and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 [Data Governance Act] (OJ L 152, 3.6.2022, 1-44) (EU).
Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2023 on harmonised rules on fair access to and use of data and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 and Directive (EU) 2020/1828 [Data Act] (OJ L 322, 22.12.2023, 2854) (EU).
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No 300/2008, (EU) No 167/2013, (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828 [Artificial Intelligence Act] (OJ L 167, 12.7.2024, 1689) (EU).
Sejm Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. (2026). Rządowy projekt ustawy o systemach sztucznej inteligencji (druk nr 2443). Retrieved 10.07.2026 from https://www.sejm.gov.pl/Sejm10.nsf/PrzebiegProc.xsp?nr=2443.
Selcuk, S., Konca, N. K., & Kaya, S. (2025). AI-driven civil litigation: Navigating the rigor and ethics of algorithmic decision-making. Computer Law & Security Review, 45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2025.106136.
Shi, C., Sourdin, T., & Li, B. (2021). The Smart Court - A New Pathway to Justice in the Digital Era. International Journal for Court Administration, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.36745/ijca.367.
Sharma, M. (2023). INDIA'S COURTS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: A critical appraisal. Lexonomica, 15(1), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.18690/lexonomica.15.1.99-120.2023.
Solihin, F., Budi, I. Y., & Rochman, E. (2025). Learning-based information extraction to obtain case metadata from judicial decisions. Mathematical Modelling of Engineering Problems, 12(5). https://doi.org/10.18280/mmep.120517.
Teremetskyi, V. I., Burylo, Y., & Bandura, I. (2025). Application of artificial intelligence as a way to optimize judicial workflows. Via Inveniendi et Iudicandi, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.15332/19090528.11118.
Torres, M. L. G. (2025). Judicial Administration 4.0: strengths, challenges, and prospects. TalTech Journal of European Studies, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.2478/bjes-2025-0007.
UNESCO. (2021). Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence. Retrieved 19.10.2025 from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000380455.locale=en.
UNESCO. (2023). Global toolkit on AI and the rule of law for the judiciary. Retrieved 19.10.2025 from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000387331.
Ustawa z dnia 17 lutego 2005 r. o informatyzacji działalności podmiotów realizujących zadania publiczne [Act on Computerisation of Public Administration] (Dz.U. 2005, nr 64, poz. 565) (Poland).
Ustawa z dnia 17 listopada 1964 r. – Kodeks postępowania cywilnego [Civil Procedure Code] (Dz.U. 1964, nr 43, poz. 296) (Poland).
Yoon, A. H. (2023). Technological Challenges Facing the Judiciary. In Engstrom, D. F. (Eds.), Legal Tech and the Future of Civil Justice (pp. 349-367). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009255301.020.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Patrycja Płończak-Kraus

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 60
Number of citations: 0