Does automation of legal processes pose threat to lawyers?

With the arrival of artificial intelligence (AI), automated software agents and so called “Internet of Things” (IoT) – devices simply cannot be ignored, though some would call it disruptive. There has been an explosion of articles in popular press about the importance of artificial intelligence and why our traditional legal practices should welcome and adopt the same.

However, these articles fail to address the dangers of automating everything, including every aspect of traditional legal practice!What we are afraid of (– well possible myself) is giving machines the ability to control crucial matters with limited opportunities for humans to veto decisions or revoke control.

For instance, what will be the impact of Artificial intelligence in smart or electronic contracts with regards to our evidence law- which law requires that all documents produced before court for inspection must be original, and notarized. To the public, automation of legal practice especially land conveyance sounds attractive and cost efficient, but controllers will need to design, develop and apply their algorithm’s in a transparent, predictable and verifiable manner.

Although automation of legal practice is seemingly inevitable (for the simple reason that lawyers far from relish the site of piles of paperwork on their desks) the automation process should at least focus on the degree to which legal tasks are simple or complex. The questions lingering on most lawyers’ minds however remains whether automation will substitute lawyers or increase their earning power? Will the trend be dominant, and what will be the extent of its effects?

Though steadily but surely being accepted in Kenya i.e. Recommendations to digitise land transactions in Kenya, one vehemently opposed by the Law Society of Kenya, the future of law and computation is more open ended than most commenters suggest.

We need to acknowledge that whilst predicting the future of legal automation, we need to take key considerations, both internal and external variables that play a pivotal role in the legal profession.

Different types of legal work are more or less susceptible to automation, and society should as such be more or less regulatory or more or less open to procedural protections.

Many would agree that the days of manually “Shepardising” cases like cats are long gone. It’s easier to conduct legal research online using tools like Kenya law, Westlaw or LexisNexis. Other apps can even now automate basic wills, incorporate company documents, and Kenya may soon join the league of automating land transactions.

We need to nonetheless keep in mind that automation of the legal profession may reflect larger trends towards inequality in the economy. Those at the bottom of the profession would continue to be replaced by software, whereas those at the helm would find software complementing their expertise and connections, further extending their reach and power.

Admittedly, most lawyers spend significant amounts of time doing repetitive work, which is usually not the best or most efficient use of an attorney’s time. But isn’t that where they earn their bread!?

It’s also agreeable that simple legal jobs (such as document coding, filing and review) are ripe for automation. More complex tasks cannot be easily routinized by way of automation, because AI will struggle to emulate human creativity which is subjective and hard to measure.

Baston Woodland, Advocate of the High Court of Kenya.