THE JUDICIARY AS A CONSTRUCTIVE INSTITUTION IN THE AGE OF AI: POWER, JUSTICE, AND THE CRISIS OF DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v22.n2.3084Keywords:
Judiciary, Artificial Intelligence (AI), Justice, Power, DemocracyAbstract
This article aims to re-examine the role and power structure of the judiciary in the context of globalization and the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI). Its primary objective is to clarify the functional transformations, legitimacy, and critical capacity of the judiciary—particularly judges—when confronted with data-driven power, the technocratization of justice, and the erosion of trust in the rule of law. Research methodology is based on humanistic philosophy and critical social theory. It uses an interdisciplinary approach that is connected to legal studies, political science, the sociology of law, and the philosophy of technology. The article, similarly, uses dialectics in a way that inverts and transposes the pairs: rule of law and technocracy, freedom and control, principles and rules, and legality and morality. The upshot is that the judiciary has moved from being a law-interpreting institution to a political and moral actor. It became a new centre of power in fragile representative institutions. Judges are increasingly acting as moral and social agents, moving beyond the purely neutral role of legal experts enforcing the law within the framework of a stable professional life with a stable income. However, it is also clear that its success can change the character of the judicial function in a way which may weaken democratic representation and allow for an unbounded extension of the scope of judicial action, if the fact that judicial action has a second face – the face of law enforcement – is not fully taken into account. The article emphasizes the need for restructuring the judiciary as an open, dialogical institution—closely linked to social life and subject to institutional and moral oversight—to ensure the safeguarding of justice, democracy, and humanity in the emerging global order.
References
[1]. Bellamy, R. (2007). Political constitutionalism: A republican defense of the constitutionality of democracy. Cambridge University Press.
[2]. Benhabib, S. (2002). The Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era. Princeton University Press.
[3]. Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new Jim code. Polity Press.
[4]. Berman, P. S. (2011). Global Legal Pluralism: A Jurisprudence of Law Beyond Borders. Cambridge University Press.
[5]. Bourdieu, P. (1987). The Force of Law: Toward a Sociology of the Juridical Field. Hastings Law Journal, 38(5), 805–853.
[6]. Citron, D. K., & Pasquale, F. (2014). The scored society: Due process for automated predictions. Washington Law Review, 89(1), 1–33.
[7]. Cohen, J. (2012). Democracy and the digital public sphere. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 40(3), 261–297.
[8]. Cohen, J. (2019). Democracy and the digital public sphere. In T. Baldwin-Philippi (Ed.), Digital Democracy (pp. 15–34). Oxford University Press.
[9]. Cohen, J. E. (2019). Between Truth and Power: The Legal Constructions of Informational Capitalism. Oxford University Press.
[10]. Derrida, J. (1992). Force of Law: The Mystical Fo
[11]. Foundation of Authority. In D. Corell, M. Rosenfeld, & D. Gray Carlson (Eds.), Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice (pp. 3–67). Routledge.
[12]. Douzinas, C. (2000). The end of human rights: Critical legal thought at the turn of the century. Hart Publishing.
[13]. Dworkin, R. (1977). Taking Rights Seriously. Harvard University Press.
[14]. Dworkin, R. (1986). Law's Empire. Law's University Press.
[15]. Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor—St Martin's Press, M. (2005). The Boundaries of Welfare: European Integration and the New Spatial Politics of Social Protection. Oxford University Press.
[16]. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punishment: The Birth of the Prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Pantheon Books.
[17]. Fraser, N. (2009). Scales of justice: Reimagining political space in a globalizing world. Polity.
[18]. Fraser, N. (2009). Scales of Justice: Reimagining Political Space in a Globalizing World. Columbia University Press.
[19]. Fukuyama, F. (2014). Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy. Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
[20]. Habermas, J. (1996). Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. MIT Press.
[21]. Honneth, A. (2014). Freedom's Social Foundations of Democratic Life. Columbia University Press.
[22]. Kelsen, H. (2005). Pure Theory of Law. The Lawbook Exchange.
[23]. König, P. D., & Rasch, M. (2021). The constitutional value of algorithmic transparency. German Law Journal, 22(1), 1–17.
[24]. Komesar, N. K. (2001). Law's Limits: Law and the Supply and Demand of Rights. Cambridge University Press.
[25]. Kumm, M. (2009). The Cosmopolitan Turn in Constitutionalism: The Relationship between Constitutionalism in and Beyond the State. NYU Law Review, 74, 1–44.
[26]. Latour, B. (2009). The making of law: An ethnography of the Conseil d’État. Polity Press.
[27]. Latour, B. (2010). The Making of Law: An Ethnography of the Conseil d'État. Polity.
[28]. Luhmann, N. (2004). Law as a social system (K. Ziegert, Trans.). Oxford University Press.
[29]. Morozov, E. (2013). To save everything, click here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism. PublicAffairs.
[30]. Pasquale, F. (2015). The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information. Harvard University Press.
[31]. Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Harvard University Press.
[32]. Raz, J. (1979). The authority of law: Essays on law and morality. Oxford University Press.
[33]. Rosanvallon, P. (2011). The Society of Equals. Harvard University Press.
[34]. Santos, B. de S. (2002). Toward a New Legal Common Sense: Law, Globalization, and Emancipation. Butterworths.
[35]. Scheppele, K. L. (2004). Constitutio al Ethnography. Law & Soci ty Review, 38(3), 389–406.
[36]. Scheppele, K. L. (2005). Democracy by judiciary: Why courts can be more democratic than parliaments. In A. Sajó (Ed.), Rethinking the Rule of Law after Communism (pp. 25–60). CEU Press.
[37]. Scheppele, K. L. (2013). Not your father's autfather' sanism: The creation of the Frankenstat. The University of Chicago Law Review, 90, 1755–1794.
[38]. Stone Sweet, A. (2000). Governing with Judges: Constitutional Politics in Europe. Oxford University Press.
[39]. Supiot, A. (2017). Governance by
[40]. Numbers: The Making of a Legal Model of Allegiance. Hart Publishing.
[41]. Supiot, A. (2017). Governance by Numbers: Creating a Legal Model of Allegiance (S. Brown, Trans.). Hart Publishing.
[42]. Tate, C. N., & Vallinder, T. (Eds.). (1995). The Global Expansion of Judicial Power. NYU Press.
[43]. Teubner, G. (1993). Law as an Autopoietic System. Blackwell.
[44]. UNDP. (2021). Human Development Report 2021/2022: Uncertain Times, Unsettled Lives. United Nations Development Programme.
[45]. Waldron, J. (2006). The core of the case against judicial review. The Yale Law Journal, 115(6), 1346–1406.
[46]. Yeung, K. (2018). Algorithmic regulation: A critical interrogation. Regulation & Governance, 12(4), 505–523.
[47]. Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs.
[48]. Narongrach, R., & Nantakat, B. . (2025). Shadow Puppetry and Thai Politics: Power, Humor, and the Art of Political Satire in Southern Thailand. Asian Journal of Arts and Culture, 25(2), e280620. https://doi.org/10.48048/ajac.2025.280620
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
I (we) submit this article which is original and unpublished, of my (our) own authorship, to the evaluation of the Veredas do Direito Journal, and agree that the related copyrights will become exclusive property of the Journal, being prohibited any partial or total copy in any other part or other printed or online communication vehicle dissociated from the Veredas do Direito Journal, without the necessary and prior authorization that should be requested in writing to Editor in Chief. I (we) also declare that there is no conflict of interest between the articles theme, the author (s) and enterprises, institutions or individuals.
I (we) recognize that the Veredas do Direito Journal is licensed under a CREATIVE COMMONS LICENSE.
Licença Creative Commons Attribution 3.0
