Can Artificial Intelligence Replace Judges and Lawyers?

Astana, Kazakhstan — This issue took center stage at the International MaxUp Legathon 2026, held in Astana, where students and legal experts examined the growing role of AI in legal systems worldwide. Hosted by Maqsut Narikbayev University, the event brought together participants from 23 universities across 13 countries. Competitors were divided into two leagues: 10 English-speaking teams and 13 Russian-speaking teams, reflecting the competition’s international scope.

Participants where challenged with a complex ethical questions: Can AI make moral judgments? Who is accountable if an AI system delivers an unjust verdict? And should human lives be entrusted to algorithms in the name of efficiency?

The concept of AI-powered courtrooms—where algorithms replace jurors and automated systems act as lawyers—sparked both curiosity and concern.

Experts at the event emphasized that while AI excels at processing data and identifying patterns, it lacks the human qualities essential to justice. Judicial decisions require not only factual analysis but also empathy, moral reasoning, and the ability to interpret context—areas where machines still fall short.

According to Sergey Pen, Deputy Chairman for Science, Innovation, and Artificial Intelligence at Maqsut Narikbayev University, current AI systems are not capable of replacing judges. “Language models generate answers based on statistical patterns and existing data, but they cannot reproduce the legal chain of reasoning,” he explained. “This is a fundamental limitation.” Pen stressed that while AI can assist with research and data analysis, it cannot provide the justification required for judicial decisions—a cornerstone of any legal system. “Only a human judge can legitimise and deliver a judicial ruling,” he added.

In countries like Kazakhstan, AI is already being used to support the judiciary. Systems can analyze legislation, review case histories, and identify patterns across similar disputes, helping judges maintain consistency and efficiency. However, these tools are reported to remain supplementary, where the final decisions—and their legal legitimacy—rest solely with human judges. A similar approach is seen in China, where AI has been introduced in courtrooms for basic administrative tasks. According to law student Hongyi Chen from the China University of Political Science and Law, AI can assist in finding relevant cases or filling in procedural gaps, but it does not determine verdicts.

Research presented by students from Georgia highlighted a key challenge: the gap between what technology can do and what the law permits. While AI may be technically capable of handling certain legal tasks, it lacks the ethical judgment required for fair decision-making.

At the heart of the debate lies a fundamental concern—the absence of human conscience in machines. Without empathy or moral awareness, AI cannot fully evaluate the nuances of individual cases.

For now, the consensus among experts is clear: artificial intelligence can enhance legal systems, but it cannot replace the human role at their core. As the technology evolves, the legal world faces a delicate balancing act—embracing innovation while preserving the principles of justice that depend on human judgment.

Original Report By Ayaulim Amangeldina | Published on April 14, 2026

https://www.euronews.com/2026/04/14/can-ai-systems-replace-human-judges-and-lawyers