Magistrate to be sanctioned if 'dazzled' by misuse of algorithm

The conduct of the magistrate who improperly uses artificial intelligence systems should be subject to disciplinary sanction in violation of the principle of diligence that must characterise judicial activity. This was emphasised by Milan's Attorney General Francesca Nanni during the event, held at the Palazzo di giustizia, that introduced the week "Talk to the future" traditionally dedicated to the technological challenges to the legal profession.

Attention then should be paid to artificial intelligence, in a context in which the first judgments on the consequences of "blunders" of the algorithm are beginning to arrive. For Nanni, the use of artificial intelligence systems should, at this stage, be concentrated on activities of a semi-administrative nature that affect prosecutors. Three examples: the calculation of the limitations, both of the crime and the penalty; the scheduling of hearings; and the expiry of investigation and pre-trial detention deadlines. Nanni went on to say that he was in favour of the declaration on the use of the Ai by both magistrates and lawyers.

In an articulate speech, the President of the Court of Appeal, Giovanni Ondei, focused on a series of concrete examples of the 'new mentality' to which the magistrate is called. From the verification of primary sources, to the care of the motivation of the measure not only in the result, but also in the method used. More and more, Ondei recalled, a distinction must be made, also in organisational practices, between support and decision-making activities. The former involve help for ancillary activities, to organise, to construct research strings, pre-review style and consistency; decision, on the other hand, means: evaluation of the facts and evidence, interpretation and application of the law, motivation, choice of the solution to be applied in the concrete case.

Antonino La Lumia, president of the Milan Bar Council, highlighted how 'artificial intelligence, when used well, does not take humanity away from the professional: it gives it back to him. It takes over the executive operations - research, classification, synthesis, drafts - and frees the professional to do what no system can ever do: build trust, read the human complexity of a case, make the right choice in uncertainty, be on someone's side with fullness of judgement and conscience. The extended lawyer is not a halved lawyer. He is a lawyer freer to be, really, a lawyer'.

Finally, there was a clash between Milan Court President Fabio Roia and Deputy Minister of Justice Francesco Paolo Sisto, on the telematic criminal process.