The first event organized by the Istanbul Bar Association IT Law Commission in 2025 garnered significant interest from Istanbul Bar lawyers. Speaking at this event, Dr. Gizem Gültekin Varkonyi from the University of Szeged, Hungary, addressed the advantages and risks of artificial intelligence and the European Union’s AI Act in her presentation titled “Artificial Intelligence in Law and Artificial Intelligence Law.”
Dr. Varkonyi introduced the topic by stating that artificial intelligence is used in law for **prediction** and **data classification**. As Dr. Varkonyi explained, the use of AI for prediction in law involves algorithms determining the probability of a legal dispute concluding favorably for the lawyers or parties. Accordingly, a dispute will be examined by the algorithm, and the probability of winning will be stated as a percentage. This differs from preventive policing activities. Data classification, on the other hand, refers to the categorization of words based on their semantic meanings in natural language processing. It is mostly used in administrative activities, such as classifying case files.
Dr. Varkonyi stated that because artificial intelligence is a human product, it cannot be entirely isolated from inherent human **biases and discriminatory tendencies**, but that such dangers can be prevented through legal regulations. She cited the **European Union AI Act** as an example. However, she also pointed out that this regulation and other related rules have a restrictive effect on the use and development of artificial intelligence in law in Europe.
Following this, Dr. Varkonyi addressed examples from countries outside Europe, stating that the use of artificial intelligence in law is more widespread there. She first noted that the literature on this subject is richer in the United States and the United Kingdom, where the Anglo-Saxon legal system is applied, compared to Europe, and that more work is being done in these countries to integrate AI into the legal system. She then stated that the **People’s Republic of China** is the other country prominent in the use of AI in law, actively utilizing AI, especially in interpersonal legal disputes such as uncontested divorce cases, and is a country undergoing significant digitalization in the judiciary.
One of the points Dr. Varkonyi touched upon was the influence of the developers’ cultures on algorithms. In this context, she highlighted with examples that every AI system carries the cultural patterns of its developers and operates in line with the logic of the language in which it was developed, meaning none of the current systems are completely impartial. The **ownership of these algorithms** was also indirectly discussed. In this regard, Dr. Varkonyi pointed out that the budgets of public institutions are insufficient for the development of AI systems, that these systems are sourced externally, and that this creates **dependence on private companies**, even for large organizations like Europol.
In conclusion, the days when we will see **robots on the judge’s bench are still far away**. However, we are in the days when AI technologies are starting to be used in various areas of the judiciary and in law enforcement. Thus, artificial intelligence has today become integrated into the judicial system. We believe that in the face of this transformation, **the rights of individuals and the public nature of the judiciary must be guaranteed**.
Av. Celil Aktaş, LL.M.