A judge in Colombia made headlines, but also caused controversy, after he admitted in official documents that he also asked the artificial intelligence program ChatGPT what decision it should make in one of the cases it had to decide.

The fact that the judge admitted to using ChatGPT and said it helped him sparked heated debate, with some arguing it was crazy to use such a program for something as serious as a court sentence.

Others, on the contrary, said that things would move faster and more efficiently if the justice system also used the latest technology.

Judge Juan Manuel Padilla in the city of Cartagena was scheduled to rule on health insurance for a child with autism. The parents could not afford the costs associated with treatment and transportation and argued that health insurance should cover these costs.

In justifying the decision, the judge noted that he had asked ChatGPT whether, under Colombian law, minors with autism are exempt from paying for treatment. ChatGPT replied that yes, that is correct, minors diagnosed with autism are exempt from paying for treatment according to the laws of the South American country.

The judge also said Colombia’s judicial system could become more efficient if technology were also used. He also explained that he based his final decision on similar cases from the past, so he did not leave it up to ChatGPT.

Padilla also noted that ChatGPT can make certain tasks easier, but it’s not about the app replacing people and making legal decisions for them.

A big problem with ChatGPT is that it gives answers that sound good grammatically, but often don’t provide the correct information. A chatbot gives the impression that it “knows” everything it is sure of, but it can give out a lot of false information, “packaged” very nicely.

Sources: AFP, Guardian

Photo source: Dreamstime.com