Regulation of Artificial Intelligence In The Legal Profession In Sri Lanka

Abstract

This paper examines the laws and policies pertaining to artificial intelligence in Sri Lanka and the implications of the usage of artificial intelligence in the Sri Lankan legal system. This work delves into the primary sources, including The Sri Lankan Computer Crimes Act No. 24 of 2007, The Personal Data Protection Act No. 09 of 2022, The Online Safety Act No. 09 of 2024, and the National AI Strategy by the Ministry of Technology. Further, the paper also focuses on secondary sources, including research articles that are accessible online. This analysis concentrates on and compares Sri Lanka's regulatory positions with those of countries such as the United States, the European Union, and Singapore on international approaches. By being attentive to the laws related to artificial intelligence in the aforementioned countries, the study investigates the inadequacies in Sri Lankan law and order as the primary aspect. Additionally, this paper focuses on the application of artificial intelligence on courtroom procedures, legal research, and documentation procedures. This study employs a combination of doctrinal and non-doctrinal legal analysis to explore how artificial intelligence influences the legal system in Sri Lanka. The doctrinal legal analysis focuses on the existing primary sources on artificial intelligence, concentrating on the selected ones that are more pertinent to the research objectives related to artificial intelligence in Sri Lanka. In contrast, the non-doctrinal approach examines the practice in Sri Lanka and previously cited countries related to above-mentioned applicational classifications. Additionally, the paper analyses the potential risks, such as dehumanization due to the supremacy of artificial intelligence, ethical risk, safety risk, and inherent biases. The paper concludes by outlining a set of reforms by considering the challenges encountered during the adaptations and pragmatic usage of artificial intelligence compared to the above-referenced countries, which have separate regulations for artificial intelligence.