AI AND THE DEATH OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION: MUCH ADO OVER NOTHING

Abstract

This article examines the usage, risks, challenges, and potential legal liabilities of AI in legal practice. Using statutory interpretation, doctrinal analysis, and content analysis, the article examines the usage of artificial intelligence in legal practice and analyses the ethical and legal implications of such practice with a special focus on Malaysia, with useful precedents from the United States of America (USA) and the United Kingdom (UK). AI systems can be challenged for 'unauthorised provision of legal practice’. In Malaysia, only authorised persons can practice as advocates and solicitors, leaving out the position of AI tools as ambiguous. This article considers whether AI systems give legal advice and represent clients in courts in Malaysia. By tracing the development in the UK, US, and Europe, the article recommends regulating online legal advice and emphasising human oversight for using such AI systems. As the discourse on potential legal liabilities arising from the deployment of AI is still evolving, this article is confined to contemporary discourse on the issues. Countries may need to revisit their strict regulation on legal practitioners in lieu of the widespread use of AI tools to assist advisory and representation. AI systems may not be suited to professions that depend substantially on 'human professional conduct and etiquettes' such as legal practice. In such an instance, AI is best for 'human in the loop decision-making model’ but not to replace the professional human.