Nairobi, Kenya, May 16 – Supreme Court Judge Isaac Lenaola has issued a warning to legal practitioners over the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in court submissions, after a recent incident where a judge discovered that citations submitted by lawyers were entirely fabricated by AI tools.
Speaking during a judiciary event on digital transformation, Justice Lenaola said that while the judiciary remains committed to technological innovation, the legal profession must exercise caution when incorporating AI tools in legal work particularly in legal drafting and submissions.
“Yesterday, I was reading a case where a judge was horrified because of what had happened to him.Lawyers filed submissions using AI. All the authorities were fake. The language was beautiful, but when the judge cross-referenced the authorities, all of them were created by artificial intelligence,” he said.
He warned of the professional embarrassment and legal risk that could result if judges unknowingly relied on false references.
“Can you imagine the embarrassment if he delivers a judgment, then the AI tools tell him… this is not created by you, this is AI, and all the authorities are fake?” Lenaola posed.
Justice Lenaola urged lawyers to refrain from using AI in legal filings until formal guidelines are issued.
“Please, judges, lawyers who are here. until we give you guidelines, please avoid AI for now,” he said.
He revealed that the judiciary has constituted a special team to develop official guidelines for the use of AI in court processes.
Judge Lenaola said that the Law Society of Kenya was also involved to ensure the legal profession is not left behind.
“I’ve just put together a team to work on artificial intelligence and to create guidelines for the use of artificial intelligence by our courts,” he said.
The judge also pointed to international examples where misuse of AI has led to disciplinary action against judges, including in Colombia, New York, and Brazil.
Justice Lenaola emphasized the judiciary’s ongoing commitment to technological reform. He acknowledged delays in transitioning to a fully paperless court system, citing budget constraints particularly in ICT but affirmed that the transformation is still on course.
“We are still intent, and we are still focused on ensuring that we become paperless soonest. You will see sustained innovation in the world of technology,” he said.
