Artificial intelligence can assist lawyers and the Judiciary, but its use must remain critical, human-centered and subject to human judgment, then Acting Chief Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen said during a special lecture in Baguio City.

Leonen delivered the lecture, titled “The Critical Use of AI: Challenges for the Philippine Legal Profession and the Judiciary,” on 20 August at the Supreme Court Session Hall, attended by trial court judges, lawyers and law students from across the Cordillera region.

He urged legal professionals to verify AI-generated outputs, protect sensitive information, document their use of AI and preserve independent legal and analytical judgment.

As chair of the Supreme Court’s Committee on Human-Centered Augmented Intelligence, Leonen discussed the Court’s Governance Framework on the Use of Human-Centered Augmented Intelligence in the Judiciary, approved by the Supreme Court En Banc on 18 February.

The framework supports the Strategic Plan for Judicial Innovations 2022-2027, which promotes technological innovation in court operations and the administration of justice.

Leonen said AI can generate language and provide context, but its fluency should not be mistaken for human understanding.

“An AI model can parse a contract; it can analyze it, but it cannot tell you whether these two parties understood the words the way the words read,” he said, noting that AI may fail to recognize irony, regional expressions and the difference between what a witness says and what the witness actually means.

He distinguished digitalization from AI, explaining that digitalization moves court processes and records from paper to digital platforms, while AI involves systems capable of predicting, classifying and generating information.

Leonen said human intelligence remains distinct because it is shaped by lived experiences.

“The difference of human thinking from that of AI can never be covered by an update or the next release note,” he said.

He identified four approaches to AI use: use, responsible use, ethical use and critical use. The last places the greatest responsibility on the user, who must be capable of identifying and correcting AI-generated errors.

“Critical use means that when you use AI, you should be capable of catching its errors,” Leonen said.

He also urged lawyers and judges to maintain an “interval” between receiving information and making decisions, allowing them to exercise independent judgment rather than simply accepting AI-generated answers.

The Supreme Court currently uses the AI-powered transcription tool Scriptix to reduce court stenographers’ workload while retaining human oversight.