KUALA LUMPUR (Oct 28): Chief Justice Tun Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh has warned that while technology, specifically artificial intelligence (AI), could help accelerate the administration of justice, it should never replace human judgement and judicial discretion. 

“Technology can accelerate the administration of justice, but it can never become the author of justice itself. The duty belongs exclusively to us, human custodians of the law,” he said.

Speaking during his keynote address at the International Malaysia Law Conference 2026 here on Wednesday, Wan Ahmad Farid said that the judiciary will issue new practice directions to lawyers and court officers for legal proceedings within the next few weeks. 

He said the move comes amid concerns over the reliability of AI-generated legal submissions, which could appear convincing despite containing inaccurate information and legal precedence. 

“Today, AI can produce submissions that look polished and persuasive, but entirely wrong. On our part, we will issue a practice direction in a few weeks’ time in respect of the usage of AI in legal proceedings,” he said. 

While acknowledging that AI is a useful tool, Wan Ahmad Farid issued a sharp warning against using unchecked AI outputs in court pleadings or advisory opinions.

“Both as a matter of principle... and as a matter of practicality, because AI is currently unreliable with hallucinations and so on, it cannot be overemphasised that any information provided by AI must be rigorously checked before it's passed on into an advice, a submission, or a judgement,” he stressed.

He also cautioned lawyers against a subtle intellectual decay on those who rely habitually on automated tools.

“If you don't use a muscle, it tends to atrophy. If you get into the automatic habit of always consulting AI when you have a legal problem, may there not be a risk that your legal thought processes start to dry up or at least fail to develop as they should?” he said. 

He also reminded judges and legal practitioners of the importance of intellectual honesty, particularly as technology continued to transform the legal profession.

For judges, he said, this meant ensuring that judgements reflected a proper appreciation of the facts and law, including addressing arguments that challenged their conclusions.

Lawyers, meanwhile, must ensure that legal authorities were cited accurately, and that clients were given honest advice, particularly when their legal position remained uncertain.

He reminded judges that they must decide cases based on the law and evidence without yielding to public pressure or external influence.

As an example, Wan Ahmad Farid used the 2023 reforms to abolish the mandatory death penalty, for why human judgement is important in the age of AI. 

The reforms, he said, allow judges to consider the circumstances of individual cases instead of being bound by a mandatory death sentence.

Wan Ahmad Farid said technology could not replicate the human considerations involved in administering justice, particularly when balancing the rights of accused persons with the interests of victims.

“No computer programme can look into the eyes of a victim and offer vindication, nor can it look at an accused person and temper justice with mercy,” he said.

Speaking to reporters after the event, Wan Ahmad Farid said that the aforementioned guidelines would apply to legal practitioners and court officers only. 

“We are not going to discourage them (from using AI). We are encouraging them, but there has to be a guideline for them to follow. It could help expedite court proceedings and save valuable time for judges and lawyers, provided the technology was used responsibly,” he said. 

“As long as it is properly used, it saves a lot of judicial time for the judges and saves time for the lawyers. It is something that whether we hate it or love it, it is there. So, we have to embrace it,” he said.