Qatar Introduces New AI Usage Rules for Courts
In a significant move, lawyers in Qatar have been cautioned about the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in case preparation. This follows a recent incident where a lawyer was held in contempt of court for citing references generated by AI that did not exist.
New Procedural Directive
The Qatar International Court and Dispute Resolution Centre (QICDRC) has implemented a new procedural directive effective from the start of this year. This directive applies to all litigants and representatives appearing before courts or tribunals in the country.
This regulatory change follows an incident in Dubai, where a lawyer was found to have cited several fictitious cases during an employment claim last year. These cases were fabricated by AI tools used in preparing legal materials. This is the first instance of its kind to come before the court.
Consequences of Misuse
As a result, the lawyer was found in contempt of court and breached article 35.2 of the Qatar Financial Centre regulations for citing fake cases. To mitigate the repercussions, the lawyer’s identity was withheld to avoid a disproportionately harsh penalty. However, the court has indicated it will not anonymize similar cases in the future.
Expectations for Legal Representatives
The QICDRC’s directive outlines clear expectations regarding the verification of AI-generated content. While AI use is encouraged for its potential to reduce costs and enhance effectiveness, those appearing before the court must ensure the accuracy of the information they present.
Specifically, the directive states that:
- There is no requirement for a pre-emptive declaration of using AI unless explicitly requested by the court.
- Disclosure of AI use may be required for fairness and good faith towards other parties involved in the case.
- Documents containing AI-generated content must be identifiable, and legal representatives must be prepared to explain how the output was verified, potentially requiring an affidavit.
- Any video or audio evidence produced using AI must be declared to the court to avoid exclusion.
Limitations on AI Usage
The directive further emphasizes that representatives should not rely solely on AI for case preparation. Furthermore, any confidential or privileged information must not be entered into an AI tool unless its privacy and security can be guaranteed.
As AI technology continues to evolve, the legal field must adapt to ensure its application maintains the integrity of the judicial process while leveraging the benefits AI can provide.
