The Supreme Court of the Philippines has taken a significant step toward modernizing its operations by approving the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in court processes. In a resolution dated February 18, 2026, and made public on March 19, the SC introduced the ‘Governance Framework on the Use of Human-Centered Augmented Intelligence in the Judiciary.’ This framework outlines how AI can be integrated into judicial functions while maintaining ethical standards and protecting the rule of law.

Scope of AI in Judicial Functions

The resolution permits the use of AI in various aspects of court operations, including preparing documents for adjudication. AI tools can assist with voice-to-text transcription, translation, and the automated compilation or generation of legal authorities, citations, and other paratext. Legal research, document summarization, and automated processing—such as optical character recognition and data redaction—will also be enhanced through AI.

The framework specifies that AI is not intended to replace human judgment but to augment it. The Supreme Court emphasized that AI tools must not be the sole basis for adjudicatory decisions. Human decision-makers remain responsible for legal reasoning and final judgments, ensuring that the rights and duties of parties are determined fairly and impartially.

According to the resolution, any member of the judiciary, including those from the Supreme Court to lower courts, as well as court users, vendors, and third-party contractors involved in developing or using AI tools, must disclose their involvement. This transparency is a crucial component of the governance framework, aimed at maintaining accountability and trust in the judicial system.

Ethical Considerations and Safeguards

The Supreme Court highlighted that AI tools must not be used if they could harm stakeholders, violate rights, or undermine the rule of law. The high tribunal emphasized the importance of ethical use, stating that ‘AI tools or their outputs must not be the sole basis for any adjudicatory decision.’

To ensure responsible implementation, the SC will conduct consultations with stakeholders to test AI tools and evaluate their effectiveness. This includes enhancing monitoring, auditing, and cybersecurity measures to prevent over-reliance on external parties and safeguard against potential cyberattacks or data breaches.

Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, who led the panel that developed the guidelines, stated that the principles support the ethical and responsible use of AI in the judiciary. ‘These principles reinforce the public’s faith and confidence in the independence and impartiality of the judicial system,’ he said.

The guidelines were crafted by a panel comprising Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, with Associate Justices Ramon Paul Hernando and Rodil Zalameda serving as vice chairs. The group worked closely with legal experts and technologists to ensure that the framework aligns with both legal standards and emerging AI technologies.

Implications for the Judiciary

The integration of AI into court operations is expected to streamline processes and improve efficiency. For instance, AI can assist in document summarization, reducing the time required for legal research and enabling judges to focus more on complex legal reasoning rather than administrative tasks.

However, the implementation of AI in the judiciary raises concerns about data privacy and security. The Supreme Court has emphasized the need for strong cybersecurity measures to protect sensitive legal information. Additionally, there is a need to ensure that AI systems are transparent and that their decisions can be audited and reviewed by human judges.

Legal experts have noted that the use of AI in the judiciary is not unique to the Philippines. Similar initiatives have been undertaken in other countries, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, where AI is used for tasks like case management and legal research. However, the Philippines’ approach focuses on a human-centered model that prioritizes ethical considerations and judicial independence.

The Supreme Court’s resolution sets a precedent for other jurisdictions considering the use of AI in legal systems. It provides a thorough framework that balances technological advancement with the preservation of judicial integrity. As the implementation of AI tools progresses, the judiciary will need to continuously assess their impact and make necessary adjustments to ensure fairness and accuracy in legal proceedings.

With the increasing complexity of legal cases and the growing demand for efficient judicial processes, the use of AI in court operations represents a significant shift in how the judiciary functions. This move is expected to have long-term implications for the legal profession, legal education, and the public’s perception of the judiciary.