Rudimentary AI in Judicial Decision Making: Lessons from Colombia

This perspective by Alejandro Moya Riveros, a Colombian lawyer and former auxiliary judge at Colombia’s Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP), reflects on his personal experience using rudimentary artificial intelligence as a tool in judicial work. Drawing on his time drafting complex rulings, he explains how AI helped him with research, analysis, writing quality, coherence, and deeper engagement with diverse disciplinary insights, all while emphasizing that he retained full authorship and human oversight in all judicial outputs. AI, he argues, is not a substitute for human judgment but a “sparring partner” that can make judges more efficient and thoughtful without compromising legal integrity.

Riveros highlights that AI helped him manage time better, deepen understanding of complex issues, and develop a more consistent institutional voice in the judgments he worked on. Yet, he cautions that true judicial decision-making still hinges on human intuition, normative reasoning, and the judge’s internal grasp of justice—elements that AI cannot currently replicate. Because the unwritten theory of justice resides in the judge’s mind, Riveros suggests that judges should make this theory explicit to better integrate AI as a supportive, rather than determinative, force in the future of judicial decision-making.