UK Justice Minister Calls for Debate on AI Judges

TL;DR: UK Courts Minister Sarah Sackman MP has called for urgent debate on how and when artificial intelligence should make court decisions, warning that without preparation, policy will be “overtaken by events.” Speaking at the International Bar Association conference, she emphasised that whilst AI offers extraordinary opportunities for faster, fairer justice, fundamental questions about legal ethics and human adjudication must be addressed now.

The government must start to contemplate how and when court decisions should be made by artificial intelligence, the courts minister said yesterday. Sarah Sackman MP told the International Bar Association conference in Toronto that inviting greater use of AI could bring huge potential benefits.

The Central Question: Should Machines Decide?

But she also stressed that ethics and fairness had to be at the forefront of discussions—making it essential that these issues are addressed now. “If AI decisions become the norm—and I think we have to imagine the possibility that they could, maybe not in the next three years of this parliament but maybe in 10 years—if AI decisions become the norm, what happens to the evolution of law and legal ethics itself?” she asked. “What kind of decisions should remain adjudicated by human beings and why?”

“I am not saying I or the UK government have all the answers, but we must be prepared, or else we will be overtaken by events.”

Reimagining Justice, Not Just Automating It

Sackman said that looking at the long-term future, true innovation would mean not just automating what we already do, but reimagining how we do it. “There is no reason why AI should not assist with the drafting of contracts or researching legal questions, but looking beyond that could AI one day calculate damages more accurately than a judge does now? Possibly. Could it adjudicate? Technically yes, but the question is not whether machines can decide or will be able to decide because I am pretty sure they will be, but whether they should and what we might lose if they do.”

Opportunities and Responsibilities

She told delegates that AI presents “extraordinary opportunities but also profound responsibilities.” Done right, Sackman added, AI could provide a justice system that is “faster, fairer, more accessible and perhaps even more ethical than ever before.”

“In government we are already seeing how AI can help deliver better justice: AI systems that can summarise complex case files in seconds, real-time transcription which make hearings more accessible to the citizen, smarter listing tools to manage court time more efficiently. We know that these innovations can reduce costs and delays, and make the justice system far more responsive to the citizens that rely on it.”

Sackman has spent the first part of this week in Canada and is one of the few government ministers from any jurisdiction to have attended and spoken at the IBA conference. At a joint event hosted by the Ministry of Justice and Law Society of England and Wales, she said UK legal exports to Canada reached £191m in 2024—making it the tenth largest market for British legal services worldwide.

The Broader Implications

The minister’s remarks represent one of the most explicit acknowledgements from a sitting UK government minister that AI adjudication is not merely theoretical but potentially inevitable. By framing the question as “not whether machines can decide… but whether they should,” Sackman shifts the debate from technical capability to ethical choice.

Her 10-year timeline suggests the government views AI judicial decision-making as a realistic medium-term possibility rather than distant speculation. This creates urgency around establishing frameworks now, before deployment pressures force reactive policymaking.

Key questions raised include:

  • Which types of legal decisions are suitable for AI adjudication versus requiring human judgement?
  • How does automated decision-making affect the evolution of common law and legal precedent?
  • What safeguards ensure AI systems reflect societal values around fairness and ethics?
  • How do we balance efficiency gains against potential losses in judicial discretion and contextual understanding?

For legal professionals, Sackman’s speech signals that adaptation to AI-assisted and potentially AI-led adjudication should be considered a strategic priority rather than a future possibility. The question is no longer if AI will play a role in judicial decision-making, but how that role should be bounded and governed.

Source Attribution:

Share this article