A featured contribution from Leadership Perspectives: a curated forum reserved for leaders nominated by our subscribers and vetted by our editorial board.
Chief Justice of India has urged law schools to train students in the responsible use of artificial intelligence tools. The move highlights the growing need for legal education to address AI-driven changes, ethical concerns, accuracy, accountability and emerging challenges in the legal profession.
India’s legal education system must prepare future lawyers and judges to work confidently with artificial intelligence and emerging technologies while ensuring that innovation strengthens rather than weakens the fairness of the justice system, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant. He emphasized that technological progress in courts and legal practice should be measured not simply by speed and efficiency, but by whether it continues to protect fundamental principles of justice, accountability and ethical decision-making.
Speaking at the second edition of the Vice Chancellors’ Conclave organized by National Law University, Jodhpur, CJI Kant said law schools have an important role to play in preparing students for a profession that is being reshaped by digital tools, artificial intelligence and increasingly sophisticated legal technologies. The conclave focused on ‘Legal technology and its roadmap: Positioning law as a leader in legal technology’, bringing attention to the growing intersection between legal education, technology and the future of the justice system.
CJI Kant said technology should no longer be viewed by law students as something separate from legal reasoning. Instead, it should be understood as part of the environment in which future legal professionals will practice. “they must be able to understand technology not as something external to legal reasoning, but as a part of the changing world in which they will work”, he says.
The shift, according to the CJI, requires law schools to go beyond teaching students how to operate new digital tools. Students must develop the judgment and ethical awareness needed to understand when technology should be used, how its outputs should be evaluated and where its limitations lie. “the responsibility of our law schools therefore is not simply to familiarise students with new tools, but to equip them with the judgement, adaptability and ethical grounding needed to use those tools responsibly in whichever sphere they enter”.
Artificial intelligence is already beginning to influence legal research, document analysis, contract review, case management and other areas of professional practice. Generative AI can help legal professionals process large volumes of information and perform routine tasks more efficiently, but its use also raises questions about accuracy, bias, confidentiality, accountability and the reliability of machine-generated information.
Also Read: Kufos, ICCS Partner to Expand Climate Science Education
CJI Kant acknowledged that these concerns have created a defensive instinct among some institutions to keep newer generative technologies away from classrooms. He argued, however, that simply prohibiting such tools would not prepare students for the realities they will encounter after graduation.
“It is inevitable, and an institution that resists the inevitable does not stop it; it only forfeits its own role in shaping it. The better approach is to bring these tools into the classroom in a transparent, supervised manner, so that students learn not only how to use them, but also to use them appropriately and ethically. The questions of artificial intelligence and academic integrity are therefore among the most important questions legal education must confront today”, the CJI says.
His comments also highlight a growing challenge for universities: maintaining academic integrity while allowing students to engage with technologies that are rapidly becoming part of professional life. Rather than treating AI as an automatic shortcut, legal education can use supervised exposure to teach students how to verify information, identify errors and remain accountable for the work they submit.
CJI Kant further argued that legal education should not merely respond to technological changes after they occur. Law schools, he said, should help shape how technology is introduced into the legal system so that innovation remains consistent with constitutional values and the principles underlying justice.
“Ultimately, whether this technological future serves justice or subverts it, will depend substantially on the habits we instil in our students today,” he said.
He also stressed that “it is not enough for legal education merely to adapt to technology because adaptation, by its very nature, means responding to change after it has occurred. If law is truly to lead in this space. we must aspire to something more to foresee change, shape its direction, and ensure that technology develops in service of the law and the values it seeks to uphold”.
The message places law schools at the center of India’s transition toward technology-enabled justice. As AI becomes increasingly embedded in legal research, education and court administration, the challenge will be to ensure that faster processes do not come at the expense of fairness, human judgment and public trust.