ABSTRACT

With the growth of the mass use of artificial intelligence systems, especially the so-called generative artificial intelligence and large language models, it has become relevant, on the one hand, to regulate the aforementioned processes by states, and, on the other hand, to integrate such innovative methods into various legal realities, including the judicial system. The article aims to discuss the possible challenges related to the use of artificial intelligence and their impact on Constitutional decision-making processes, in general, in terms of making a decision, as well as, its justification. The Constitutional Court, as the body exercising constitutional control of the state, and accordingly Constitutional decisions, have a significant impact in terms of establishing the practice of the interpreting national legislation. Taking into consideration abovementioned and the new approaches provided by the technological developments, it is essential to assess the role that the use of artificial intelligence can contribute in ensuring constitutional justice. Accordingly, the present article discusses the practical aspects of the use of artificial intelligence in the constitutional decision-making process, considering relevant international standards and practices. Additionally, the paper will evaluate the risks and challenges of the use of artificial intelligence in the justice process, and the final part offers possible ways of its regulation.

Keywords: Artificial Inteligence, Constitutional Court, Decision of the Court, Large language Models, Constitutional Proceedings

REFERENCES

BOOKS/MONOGRAPHY

Gegenava, D. (2012). Constitutional Justice in Georgia: Main Systemic Problems of Litigation.

Kakhiani, G. (2008). The Institute of Constitutional Control and Problems Regarding its Functioning in Georgia: Analysis of Legislation and Practice.

The Institute for Development of Freedom of Information (IDFI). (2021). Artificial Intelligence: International Tendencies and Georgia _ Legislation and Practice. https://idfi.ge/ge/artificial%20intelligence_international_tendencies_and_georgia.

Russell, S. J., Norvig, P. (2010). Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall. 2. https://people.engr.tamu.edu/guni/csce625/slides/AI.pdf.

ARTICLES

Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe, (2020). CCBE Considerations on The Legal Aspects of Artificial Intelligence. 7. https://www.ccbe.eu.

Abesadze, D. (2023). Recognition of the Content of the Norm as Unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court of Georgia _ Theoretical Observations and Practical Challenges. Constitutional Law Journal (1).

Elizbarashvili, S. (2022). The Use of Artificial Intelligence by Law Enforcement Agencies: A Modern Threat to Human Rights. Protection of Human Rights: International and National Experience, Collection of Articles, edited by Konstantine Korkelia.

Elizbarashvili, S. (2023). Human Rights Protection in the Technological Development Era: The Beginning of Artificial Intelligence Regulation. Human Rights Protection: European Experience and National Challenges. Collection of Articles, edited by Konstantine Korkelia, 79-90. Van Domselaar, I. (2018). The Perceptive Judge. Jurisprudence, 9 (1), 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1080/20403313.2017.1352319.

van Domselaar, I. (2018). The Perceptive Judge. Jurisprudence, 9 (1), 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1080/20403313.2017.1352319

Surden, H. (2024). ChatGPT, Large Language Models, and Law, 92 Fordham Law Review. 1941-1972. https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol92/iss5/9.

Krištofík, A. (2025). Bias in AI (Supported) Decision Making: Old Problems , New Technologies. International Journal For Court Administration. 16 (1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.36745/ijca.598.

Reiling, A. D. (2020). Courts and Artificial Intelligence. International Journal for Court Administration. 11 (2), 8. https://doi.org/10.36745/ijca.343.

Tai, M. C. (2020). The impact of artificial intelligence on human society and bioethics. Tzu chi medical journal, 32 (4), 339–343. https://doi.org/10.4103/tcmj.tcmj_71_20.

Coan, A., Surden, H. (2025). Artificial Intelligence and Constitutional Interpretation. Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper №24-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5018779.

Andreas, M., Chandar S., Reddy. S. (2024). Are Self-Explanations from Large Language Models Faithful? Cornell University. https://arxiv.org.

Tamošiūnienė, E., Terebeiza, Ž., Doržinkevič, A. (2024). The Possibility of Applying Artificial Intelligence in the Delivery of Justice by Courts. Baltic Journal of Law & Politics, 17 (1). 223-237. https://doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2024-0010.

Allison C. Shields. (2019). Emotional Intelligence versus Artificial Intelligence Frontlines: Simple Steps. Law Practice 45 (4), 14.

Gregory, S. Nelson. (2019) „Bias in Artificial Intelligence“, North Carolina Medical Journal 80 (4), 220-222. https://ncmedicaljournal.com/article/55108.pdf.

LEGAL DOCUMENTS

Organic Law of Georgia on „The Constitutional Court of Georgia“.

Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence, Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law. (2024). Explanatory Report to the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence, Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law. (2024).

European Commission, Proposal for a Regulation laying down harmonised rules on articifical intelligence. (2021).

The Government of British Colombia. (26 July 2023). Civil Resolution Tribunal Act. https://www2.gov.bc.ca.

Civil Resolution Tribunal Standard Rules. (20 February 2024). https://civilresolutionbc.ca.

Council of Europe European Commission for the efficiency of justice (CEPEJ). (2018). European ethical Charter on the use of Artificial Intelligence in judicial systems and their environment.

UNESCO. (2023). Global toolkit on AI and the rule of law for the judiciary. 4. https://unesdoc.unesco.org.

EU Artificial Intelligence Act.

CASE LAW

Ombudsman of Georgia Against the Parliament of Georgia, Counstitutional Court of Georgia, Decision №1/6/1737 (27 July 2023). https://www.constcourt.ge/ka/judicial-acts?legal=17641.

Blanca v. EPS, Constitutional Court of Colombia, Judgement T-323/24 (2 August 2024).

Roberto Mata v. Avianca Inc, United States District Court, S. D. New York. Decision №22-cv-1461 (22 June 2023). https://law.justia.com.

WEB-RESOURCES

Litili Group. (28 March 2025). Inside the Judge’s Chamber: Insights into Judicial Decision-Making. https://litiligroup.com/judicial-decision-making.

Coan, A., Surden, H. (16 December 2024). AI and Constitutional Interpretation: The Law of Conservation of Judgment. Lawfare. https://www.lawfaremedia.org.

UNESCO (16 August 2024). AI in the Courtroom: Colombian Constitutional Court's Landmark Ruling Cites UNESCO’s AI Tools. https://www.unesco.org/en.

Caballero, M. S. Ruling T-323/24 and the use of generative AI in Colombia’s Judiciary, Ariza & Marin, Legal News. https://arizaymarin.com/en/ruling-t-323-24.

APCEIU (16 August 2024). AI in the Courtroom: Colombian Constitutional Court's Landmark Ruling Cites UNESCO’s AI Tools. https://www.gcedclearinghouse.org.

Herrera, L. (3 October 2024). Artificial Intelligence in the Colombian Judicial System: A Summary and Analysis of Decision T-323 of 2024, El Blog del Departamento de Propiedad Intelectual. https://propintel.uexternado.edu.co.

Council of Europe, Chart of signatures and ratifications of Treaty 225. https://www.coe.int/en/web/Conventions/full-list.