人工智能的司法应用审视——以算法辅助裁判为视角

Judicial Applications of Artificial Intelligence—From the Perspective of Algorithm-Assisted Adjudication

摘要: 随着人工智能技术的快速发展，其在司法领域的应用不再局限于工具性辅助，而是逐步渗透至具有裁量性质的司法裁判核心环节。算法辅助裁判在提升司法效率、统一法律适用方面展现出巨大潜力，但其技术逻辑与司法固有的价值逻辑之间存在深层张力，这一张力具体表现为：算法的黑箱特性可能导致裁判逻辑的不透明，侵蚀司法公开；算法模型的预设偏好与数据偏差易引发“算法歧视”，违背司法平等原则；算法工具的过度应用则可能弱化法官的自由裁量权，冲击独立审判原则以及司法问责根基。基于此，文章以宪法与法理学为视角，审视算法辅助裁判在提升司法效率与促进“同案同判”等工具价值之外，所引发的深层挑战，以此界定算法辅助裁判的合理应用范围，厘清算法技术与法官裁判的权责边界，进而从算法公开机制、数据合规审查等维度，构建算法辅助裁判的规制框架，确保智慧司法在法治轨道上健康发展，最终捍卫“努力让人民群众在每一个司法案件中感受到公平正义”的根本宗旨。

Abstract: With the rapid development of artificial intelligence technology, its application in the judicial field is no longer limited to tool-based assistance but has gradually permeated the core judicial decision-making process that involves discretionary judgment. Algorithm-assisted adjudication has demonstrated significant potential in enhancing judicial efficiency and ensuring uniform application of the law. However, there is a deep tension between the technical logic of algorithms and the inherent value logic of the judiciary, which is manifested in the following aspects: the black-box nature of algorithms may lead to opaque decision-making logic, eroding judicial transparency; the pre-set preferences and data biases in algorithm models can easily result in “algorithmic discrimination”, violating the principle of judicial equality; and the excessive application of algorithmic tools may weaken the discretionary power of judges, undermining the principle of independent adjudication and the foundation of judicial accountability. Based on this, this article examines, from the perspectives of constitutional law and jurisprudence, the deep challenges brought about by algorithm-assisted adjudication beyond its instrumental values such as enhancing judicial efficiency and promoting “uniformity in similar cases”, in order to define the reasonable application scope of algorithm-assisted adjudication, clarify the boundaries of responsibilities and rights between algorithmic technology and judicial decisions, and then construct a regulatory framework for algorithm-assisted adjudication from dimensions such as algorithm transparency mechanisms and data compliance reviews, to ensure the healthy development of smart justice within the framework of the rule of law, and ultimately safeguard the fundamental purpose of “ensuring that the people feel fairness and justice in every judicial case”.