Wojciech Woloszyk (Wo?oszyk)
“The wisdom of entrusting a highly sensitive draft judgment to software or artificial intelligence in the pre-release stage is alarming, to say the least,” Judge Dennis Galiatsatos said in R. v. Pryde.
The intersection of artificial intelligence and legal translation has reached a critical juncture in Quebec’s judicial system, as highlighted by Judge Dennis Galiatsatos’s recent decision in R. v. Pryde. The ruling brings to light fundamental tensions between technological innovation and the precise requirements of legal translation, particularly within Canada’s unique bilingual and bijural framework.
The immediacy requirement under Quebec’s Charter of the French Language has created what might be termed a “jurislinguistic paradox.” While the Charter mandates “immediate and simultaneous” French translations of English judgments, this temporal pressure conflicts with the intricate nature of legal translation, where precision and jurisprudential accuracy traditionally demand careful human oversight. Judge Galiatsatos’s characterization of AI translation in courts as “alarming” reflects deeper concerns about the technology’s current limitations.
These concerns manifest across multiple dimensions of legal practice. At the constitutional level, the requirement for immediate translation has created an unexpected disparity in access to justice. English-speaking defendants potentially face longer delays than their French-speaking counterparts, raising fundamental questions about linguistic equality before the law. This operational conflict between the Charter and the Criminal Code exemplifies how linguistic requirements can directly impact substantive legal rights.
The Supreme Court of Canada’s experience further illuminates these challenges. Faced with translating over 6,000 pre-1970 rulings, the Court has encountered both practical and theoretical obstacles. Chief Justice Wagner’s estimate that traditional translation would require approximately 100 translators, 10 years, and up to $20 million underscores the scale of the challenge. While AI presents itself as a potential solution, recent tests by the Cyberjustice Laboratory have revealed concerning limitations, including the generation of non-existent Civil Code articles. This underscores a crucial point for legal professionals: while AI offers efficiency, the authoritative translation of court decisions requires human oversight to maintain accuracy, consistency, and public confidence in the justice system.
Security considerations add another layer of complexity to this discussion. Courts have expressed serious reservations about entrusting draft judgments to AI systems pre-release, recognizing that these documents often contain sensitive information that shapes individuals’ lives and legal precedents. The Supreme Court’s own experiments with machine translation have revealed errors and inconsistencies that could undermine public confidence in the judiciary.
Professor Karine McLaren of Université de Moncton and Vicky Ringuette from the Centre for Legal Translation and Documentation emphasize that AI cannot replace the expertise of lawyer-linguists who understand the intricate relationship between language, law, and legal culture. This is particularly relevant in Canada’s bijural system, where legal concepts may not have direct equivalents across legal traditions. The risk of what linguistic scholars term “false equivalence” becomes particularly acute when expedited translation sacrifices precise legal meaning for speed.
As courts worldwide face increasing pressure to become more efficient and linguistically accessible, Quebec’s experience offers valuable insights for other jurisdictions grappling with similar challenges. This situation demonstrates that while technological innovation promises efficiency, the authoritative translation of court decisions requires a more nuanced approach that balances technological capabilities with jurisprudential requirements.
The path forward likely lies in developing hybrid solutions that leverage AI’s efficiency while maintaining human oversight for accuracy and legal precision. This approach would acknowledge both the practical demands for rapid translation and the fundamental requirement for accuracy in legal documents that shape precedent and affect individual rights.
These developments represent more than a local challenge; they mark a crucial moment in the evolution of legal translation practices. As courts continue to navigate these waters, their decisions will likely shape how legal systems worldwide approach the delicate balance between technological innovation and legal precision in an increasingly multilingual judicial landscape.
Sources:
https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/r-v-pryde-quebec-judge-declares-new-7713656/
Looking for a reliable legal translation into one of the languages of Central and Eastern Europe? Reach out to IURIDICO Legal & Financial Translations
? https://tlumaczenia-prawnicze.eu/
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ai-legal-translation-quebec-courts-sound-alarm-limits-wojciech-ho2qf/
