Tech tools can simplify complex processes and improve efficiency, but considerations arise around ethics and the human touch lawyers provide. (thestraitstimes.sg)

You’re a homeowner in a dispute with a renovation firm. Or a shopkeeper who wants to recover payment from a customer. 

It’s a matter for the Small Claims Tribunals, where lawyers are not allowed to be involved. How would you help yourself as a self-represented person? 

Generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) offers the potential to help the layman navigate the legal process – if stringent safeguards are met. 

The use of Gen AI is among a slate of tech initiatives that the Singapore Courts (SG Courts) is exploring to facilitate access to justice for court users (see box).

“Increasingly, many types of proceedings are done without lawyers, as a default,” said Justice Aedit Abdullah, Judge in charge of Transformation and Innovation. “There is a desire for simpler, faster procedures, saving time and resources… Technology promises the possibility of meeting these needs.”

Justice Abdullah was speaking at the fifth instalment of SG Courts’ engagement series titled “Conversations with the Community” on May 30, held at the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS). 

In his opening address, titled “Technology as a Bridge to Justice”, he emphasised the courts’ role in ensuring access to justice. The courts are responsible for maintaining a system of justice that is accessible and meets the needs of all.

“The courts have an obligation to assist the self-represented person,” he said, “at least in the provision of legal information, so that the self-represented person can consider what steps can be taken in his or her own interest.”

How digital can enable

Smoother
Guided digital workflows help users better navigate court processes 

• The Motor Accident Claims Online website enables parties in a traffic accident to simulate their likely liability and compensation, so they can consider if it is worthwhile to bring the claim to court or reach an out-of-court settlement
   
• The Divorce eService allows parties in a simplified track divorce case to prepare and file documents online through a guided process, and automatically generate the required court papers
   
• The Probate eService helps generate the court papers needed to apply for a grant of probate to execute a dead person’s will. It also retrieves the applicant’s information from Singpass and information on the dead person from other verified government sources
   
• Generative AI, explored in collaboration with American start-up Harvey AI, can potentially guide parties in small claims cases in filing their case, drafting documents, and collating evidence.

Simpler
Legal processes are being re-designed to be more user-friendly

• Legal documents can now be signed digitally on the e-Litigation platform with Singpass
   
• Court documents can be served to parties through the Singpass inbox if attempts to serve in person are unsuccessful or impractical
   
• Users can check if a court order is authentic and issued by Singapore Courts via courtorders.gov.sg, instead of visiting the courts in person to verify or ask for a certified hard copy

Faster
Technology expedites legal proceedings for faster case resolution

• The SG Courts mobile app provides lawyers with on-the-go access to e-Litigation. Lawyers can access case files, view documents and hearing dates, and obtain queue numbers for hearings
   
• Tech tools enable remote hearings, and can potentially help translate and transcribe court testimonies more efficiently
   
• In the Small Claims Tribunal, generative AI may assist in crafting case chronologies and summaries in the future, enabling tribunal magistrates to make sense of voluminous evidence and documents

Responsibility a priority

But while technologies like Gen AI hold promise, responsible implementation remains a priority for the courts.

The courts invest significant time into developing Gen AI tools, because stringent guardrails are needed to protect users and mitigate security and ethical risks, said SG Courts chief transformation and innovation officer Tan Ken Hwee. He was the moderator at a panel discussion during the event.

For example, after six months of experimenting, SG Courts decided against launching a legal chatbot, as its answers were not reliable enough to apply to all cases – such as when asked for the number of days to appeal a decision.

“It would be extremely unsafe in an area where precision is required, where people might rely on it, perhaps to their detriment,” said Mr Tan.

There is a lot of innovation that can be done without the use of Gen AI, he stressed. Simply re-engineering court processes, combined with “careful use of well-constructed algorithms or decision trees”, can also improve the system substantially, said Mr Tan.

High-tech, high touch 

Beyond a high-tech approach, legal services must stay “high touch” to reach marginalised groups, the four panellists said.

Over a third of visitors to Pro Bono SG’s community law centre at Tian De Temple in Hougang are aged 65 and above, and many cannot speak English or surf the internet, said Ms Cai Chengying, head of community lawyering at Pro Bono SG.

To help, the charity is partnering social workers, counsellors and family coaches, who are often the first ones sought by vulnerable groups. 

These professionals can use SG Courts’ digital tools to find legal information for their clients, or direct them to the Government’s ServiceSG centres, where digital concierges are trained in using these tools.

LawGoWhere.sg, a self-help website created by Pro Bono SG, also provides information on issues often brought up at free legal clinics.

These are presented according to how people commonly phrase their situation: “I lost my job”, “I bought something and it doesn’t work”, or “Someone in my family died suddenly”.

In this vein, tools must facilitate understanding by minimising legal and technical jargon, added Mr Eugene Yan, a Singapore Management University computing and law undergraduate researching the application of large language models for the legal industry. 

“Self-represented persons already have their hands full trying to navigate the legal domain,” he said. “The last thing we want to do is introduce an additional layer of confusion in the form of technology.”

Digital but also personal

While digital tools can increasingly serve the needs of many, the “human element” of a lawyer should not be overlooked.

“(Machines) can’t provide reassurance that someone’s listening to you, someone’s empathising with you, (or) someone’s going to help you with your problem,” said Mr Alexander Woon, counsel with RHTLaw Asia and a law lecturer at SUSS.

Beyond people skills, another key value of lawyers lies in handling groundbreaking or novel cases, with no case law on which Gen AI can be trained on.

“That’s where humans have an advantage because (we) have imagination, (we) can work things out,” Mr Woon said. “If you’re asking where we should go from here, that’s something only a human being can answer.”

Justice Abdullah added that there will always be a role for lawyers to play in a technologically-advanced system, whether by supplementing areas where Gen AI falls short, or providing full-service representation for clients who want human judgment and assurance.

“There will be a spectrum of possible responses,” he said. “The judicial system should try to accommodate as much of it as possible.”