Use of AI tools in the Colombian Judiciary
Findings from Three Surveys
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59490/dgo.2025.1060Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, Algorithms, Large Language Models, Chatbots, Justice, Judges, Tribunals, Judicial Staff, ColombiaAbstract
This paper aims to answer three main questions regarding the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in the Colombian judiciary. First, what type of AI tools do judges and judicial staff in Colombia access and use? Second, how and for what purposes are these AI tools used? Third, do demographic factors (e.g., age, gender) influence how judges and judicial staff approach AI tools? This paper is based on three comprehensive surveys conducted in 2024. Two surveys conducted by the authors targeted participants in the course ”Artificial Intelligence for the Administration of Justice: Fundamentals, Applications, and Best Practices”, offered by the Universidad de los Andes and the Superior Council of the Judiciary (CSdJ). A total of 1,391 judicial staff members responded at the start of the course, and 824 responded at its conclusion. A third survey, conducted later by the CSdJ, gathered responses from 3,152 judicial personnel. Our analysis reveals that training significantly improved AI familiarity among judicial personnel—initially, 63% reported minimal knowledge, but after the 50-hour course, 85% claimed moderate to high familiarity. While approximately one-third of respondents initially used AI for work tasks, this increased to nearly half post-training. Over 80% of users accessed free AI versions, raising concerns about confidentiality as these platforms may share information with third parties. Judicial officials primarily employ generative AI for information searches and document writing, particularly for jurisprudence (59%), legislation (52%), and definitions (51%). This reliance on AI for information retrieval presents risks if outputs aren’t verified against reliable sources. Although age and gender disparities in AI familiarity exist, reported usage patterns show minimal demographic differences. These findings emphasize the importance of enhancing digital literacy among judicial professionals and inform our recommendations for developing appropriate regulations and guidelines governing AI systems in the justice sector.
Downloads
References
CEPEJ. (2024). Resource centre cyberjustice and ai [European Commission for the efficiency of justice (CEPEJ)].
Conselho Nacional de Justiça. (2024). O uso da inteligência artificial generativa no poder judiciário brasileiro: Relatório de pesquisa. [link]
Corte Constitucional. (2020). Pretoria, un ejemplo de incorporación de tecnologías de punta en el sector justicia.
Corte Constitucional. (2024). Abc pretoria [Corte Constitucional].
Estevez, E., Linares, S., & Fillottrani, P. (2020). Prometea: Transformando la administración de justicia con herramientas de inteligencia artificial. Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18235/0002378.
Gutiérrez, J. D. (2020). Retos éticos de la inteligencia artificial en el proceso judicial. In ICDP (Ed.), Derecho procesal. nuevas tendencias. xli congreso colombiano de derecho procesal. Instituto Colombiano de Derecho Procesal (ICDP) y Universidad Libre. [link]
Gutiérrez, J. D. (2023a). Chatgpt in colombian courts: Why we need to have a conversation about the digital literacy of the judiciary [VerfBlog].
Gutiérrez, J. D. (2023b). Hablemos sobre el uso de chatgpt para redactar decisiones judiciales [La Silla Vacía].
Gutiérrez, J. D. (2023c). Judges and magistrates in peru and mexico have chatgpt fever [Tech Policy Press].
Gutiérrez, J. D. (2023d). A jueces ymagistradosdeperúyméxico también le cayó la «fiebre»de chatgpt [Agenda Estado de Derecho].
Gutiérrez, J. D. (2024a). Chapter 24: Critical appraisal of large language models in judicial decision-making. In Handbook on public policy and artificial intelligence (pp. 323–338). Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781803922171.00033.
Gutiérrez, J. D. (2024b). Document for consultation: Draft unesco guidelines for the use of ai systems in courts and tribunals [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)].
Gutiérrez, J. D. (2024c). Unesco global judges’ initiative: Survey on the use of ai systems by judicial operators [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)].
Gutiérrez, J. D., & Muñoz-Cadena, S. (2023). Adopción de sistemas de decisión automatizada en el sector público: Cartografía de 113 sistemas en colombia. GIGAPP Estudios Working Papers, 10(270), 365–395.
LexisNexis Legal & Professional. (2023). Generative ai & the legal profession: 2023 survey report. [link]
Ministro do Superior Tribunal de Justiça. (2020). Artificial intelligence: Technology applied to conflict resolution in the brazilian judiciary [Fundação Getulio Vargas].
Muñoz-Cadena, S., Gutiérrez, J. D., Castellanos-Sánchez, M., & Peralta, D. S. (2025). Sistemas de ia en el sector público de américa latina y el caribe (versión v2.3) [Abril de 2025].
Saavedra, V., & Upegui, J. C. (2021). Pretoria y la automatización del procesamiento de causas de derechos humanos [Derechos Digitales América Latina y Dejusticia].
Thomson Reuters. (2024). 2024 generative ai in professional services. [link]
UNESCO. (2023). Kit de herramientas global sobre ia y el estado de derecho para el poder judicial [Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura].
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Conference Proceedings Volume
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Juan David Gutiérrez, David Stiven Peralta M.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
