UN Expert Urges Caution on AI in Justice: Human Oversight Essential to Protect Rights

Margaret Satterthwaite, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, presented a powerful and nuanced roadmap to the UN General Assembly, highlighting the promises and perils of AI in judicial contexts.

As the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) accelerates across justice systems worldwide, a top United Nations expert has issued a sobering reminder that technology must serve human rights—not override them. Margaret Satterthwaite, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, presented a powerful and nuanced roadmap to the UN General Assembly, highlighting the promises and perils of AI in judicial contexts.

Her report calls for urgent safeguards to ensure that AI tools deployed within justice systems enhance access to justice, protect judicial independence, and support equality before the law, rather than introducing hidden biases or undermining accountability.

“AI is valuable only when it enhances human rights protections and improves justice in concrete ways,” Satterthwaite declared. “It should never be pursued as an end in itself.”

The Risk of “Techno-Solutionism” in Justice

Satterthwaite specifically warned against a growing trend of “techno-solutionism”—the uncritical embrace of technological systems without adequate understanding of their human rights implications. She cautioned that such approaches often sidestep deeper structural reforms in favour of quick technological fixes, which may entrench discrimination, threaten privacy, or even restrict due process.

The report also raises the alarm over the climate impacts of AI deployment, an issue rarely discussed in the legal domain. Large-scale AI systems often require immense computational resources, which contribute to environmental degradation. The UN expert argued that justice should not come at the cost of climate justice.

“States and justice professionals should not allow ‘techno-solutionism’ to propel the adoption of systems carrying serious human rights risks and significant negative climate impacts,” she said.

A People-Centred Approach to AI in Justice

Satterthwaite acknowledged AI’s potential to improve access to justice, such as by reducing case backlogs or offering legal information in under-resourced contexts. However, she stressed that any digital transformation of legal systems must be user-driven and people-centred.

Design and deployment should reflect the diverse needs of those interacting with the justice system, especially individuals from marginalized or digitally excluded communities. With vast populations still lacking meaningful access to digital technologies, the report urges governments to critically assess whether AI is the most effective tool, or whether traditional methods remain more inclusive.

“Given the costs of developing and maintaining AI, design should be driven by users, reflecting their diverse needs,” Satterthwaite said. “States should always consider whether AI or traditional tools are best for ensuring access to justice.”

AI Must Not Replace Human Legal Actors

A key concern highlighted in the report is the irreplaceable role of human actors—especially judges and lawyers—within the justice system. The right to a fair trial, she emphasized, includes the right to access a human judge and a human legal representative. AI should support legal professionals, not replace them.

The Special Rapporteur warned that automated systems, if left unchecked, could skew judicial decisions, erode due process, or mask systemic bias behind layers of algorithmic opacity.

“The judicial branch must be responsible for the adoption of any innovation that might impact judges’ decision making,” she said.

Empowering the Judiciary with Digital and AI Literacy

In order to navigate the complex terrain of AI, the report calls for robust digital and AI literacy training for judges. Judicial institutions must be empowered to evaluate, accept, or reject new technologies based on their potential impact on independence, impartiality, and public trust.

Importantly, judges should also be given the authority to consult openly with technologists, civil society, legal experts, and the broader public before adopting AI-driven tools.

This collaborative and transparent approach would ensure that innovation is aligned with constitutional safeguards, privacy protections, and international human rights standards.

A Rights-Based Path Forward

Margaret Satterthwaite’s message is clear: AI can be a transformative force for good in justice systems—but only when human dignity, transparency, and accountability are placed at the centre of every decision.

Her report serves as a critical reminder to governments, courts, and private tech developers alike that technological innovation must never come at the cost of human rights.

By advocating for careful, inclusive, and democratic oversight of AI in justice, the UN is reinforcing the idea that technology must remain a tool of empowerment, not a new frontier for inequality or injustice.