论AI法官审判的制度冲突及其调和  

Institutional Conflict and Reconciliation of AI Judge Trial

作　　者：莫皓 Mo Hao(Law School,Southwest Minzu University,Chengdu,Sichuan,China)

机构地区：[1]西南民族大学法学院

出　　处：《四川师范大学学报(社会科学版)》2025年第2期61-70,200,201,共12页Journal of Sichuan Normal University(Social Sciences Edition)

基　　金：中央高校基本科研业务费专项基金项目“总体国家安全观视阈下数据跨境流动法治体系”(3300224643);四川省社科重点研究基地纠纷解决与司法改革研究中心项目(2023DJKTb10)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：随着大数据、人工智能技术在司法活动中的运用,理论界开始探讨AI法官审判的可能性。然而,阻碍AI法官进行审判除了技术层面的因素外,更重要的原因可能是其与现行司法制度的理念存在冲突。具体而言,AI法官审判的逻辑与当前的审级制度、开庭审理制度、证据制度以及调解制度均存在冲突。这其实源于AI法官审判在“植入”司法体系时,与司法的多元功能、制度特征、价值取向以及法院角色定位等内生系统并不兼容。AI法官审判难以与现有法院制度体系相适配,其未来发展的基本思路应该是推动制度与技术的双向调和,并采取根据案件类型与运用场景进行多维度分层式的运用路径。This research delves into the ramifications of the extensive incorporation of big data and artificial intelligence(AI)technologies within judicial proceedings,prompting an intensive scholarly exploration of the potential and consequences of AI-augmented judicial trials.Despite its capacity to elevate judicial efficiency and foster innovative trial methodologies,this nascent domain confronts a range of obstacles.This paper contends that the foundational logic of AI-driven judicial trials is in conflict with several facets of the current judicial framework.Primarily,concerning the multi-tiered judicial system,the incorporation of AI-based judicial decisions could potentially undermine the error rectification and administrative functionalities inherent within the hierarchical framework.Secondly,it may lead to a dilution of the adversarial hearing system’s integrity.The informational flow in AI-facilitated hearings tends to be prepended,written,and asynchronous,thereby lacking the essential mechanism for identifying and prioritizing pivotal information,such as the contentious issues during the hearing.This issue is particularly acute in criminal proceedings,where disparities in information processing capabilities may exacerbate the inherent inequality between the prosecution and defense.Moreover,AI-driven judicial processes are not congruent with the existing evidentiary system and rules,posing potential risks to fundamental legal principles such as the legal evidence doctrine and the obligation for witnesses to appear in court.Furthermore,the substitution of human judges by AI in mediation contexts is fraught with challenges,given that mediation necessitates negotiation and empathy skills,which are difficult for machines to emulate or replicate.Further analysis reveals that these conflicts fundamentally arise from the incompatibility between AI-driven judicial systems and the intrinsic mechanisms of justice.Specifically,beyond merely resolving disputes,judicial decisions serve multiple functions such as integratin

关 键 词：AI法官 智能裁判 算法决策 司法制度 

分 类 号：D92[政治法律—法学]