DEMOCRATIZING LEGAL AID: HARNESSING AI FOR AFFORDABLE JUSTICE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhai.v3.i1.2026.50Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence (Ai), Legal Aid, Access to Justice, AI Ethic, Legal Technology, Marginalized CommunitiesAbstract
Access to justice remains an enduring challenge for marginalized communities due to high legal fees, limited resources, and geographical constraints. While legal aid has long been the sole recourse for bridging this gap, its overstretched capacity is insufficient to meet rising demand. This article examines the transformative potential of artificial intelligence (AI) in democratizing legal aid by analyzing its ethical, practical, and regulatory challenges. AI applications – including chatbots, predictive analytics, and automated legal documentation – are scrutinized through case studies of platforms such as DoNotPay, COMPAS, ROSS Intelligence, Luminance, and LawGeex to demonstrate how AI can improve the affordability, efficiency, and accessibility of legal services. Despite its promise, AI raises critical concerns regarding algorithmic bias and data privacy that threaten to undermine fairness and inclusivity. This research situates these issues within global regulatory frameworks, encompassing the EU AI Act, OECD AI Principles, GDPR, and HIPAA, underscoring the necessity for robust standards of accountability and transparency. The article concludes by proposing policy recommendations – such as regular audits, independent oversight, and equitable funding – to ensure ethical AI deployment. The study argues that AI can transform legal aid into a more affordable and democratic system, provided its use is cautiously regulated and complemented by human supervision. Ultimately, the future of AI in legal services lies in balancing innovation with ethical safeguards to ensure justice is realized as a right, not a privilege.
References
Alvarez, J. M., Colmenarejo, A. B., Elobaid, A., Fabbrizzi, S., Fahimi, M., Ferrara, A., Ghodsi, S., & Mougan, C. (2024). Policy advice and best practices on bias and fairness in AI. Ethics and Information Technology, 26, 31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09746-w
Arcila, B. B. (2024). AI liability in Europe: How does it complement risk regulation and deal with the problem of human oversight? Computer Law & Security Review, 54, 106012. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0267364924000797
Belenguer, L. (2022). AI bias: Exploring discriminatory algorithmic decision-making models and the application of possible machine-centric solutions adapted from the pharmaceutical industry. AI and Ethics, 2, 771–787. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-022-00138-8
Camilleri, M. A. (2024). Artificial intelligence governance: Ethical considerations and implications for social responsibility. Expert Systems, 41(7), e13406. https://doi.org/10.1111/exsy.13406
Chakraborty, C., Pal, S., Bhattacharya, M., Dash, S., & Lee, S.-S. (2023). Overview of Chatbots with special emphasis on artificial intelligence-enabled ChatGPT in medical science. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 6, 1237704. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1237704
Chien, C. V. & Kim, M. (2024). Generative AI and Legal Aid: Results from a Field Study and 100 Use Cases to Bridge the Access to Justice Gap by Colleen V. Chien, Miriam Kim: SSRN. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4733061
Chouhan, K. S. (2019). Role of an AI in legal aid and access to criminal justice. International Journal of Legal Research, 6, 2. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3536194
Collenette, J., Atkinson, K., & Bench-Capon, T. (2023). Explainable AI tools for legal reasoning about cases: A study on the European court of human rights. Artificial Intelligence, 317, 103861. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.artint.2023.103861
Comunale, M. (2024). The economic impacts and the regulation of AI: A review of academic literature and policy actions. IMF Working Papers, 2024(065), 1. https://doi.org/10.5089/9798400268588.001
Dankwa-Mullan, I. (2024). Health equity and ethical considerations in using artificial intelligence in public health and medicine. Preventing Chronic Disease, 21, E64. https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd21.240245
Dhakal, D. (2024). AI in law: Debates on ethical considerations. OnlineKhabar English. https://english.onlinekhabar.com/ai-in-law-ethical-concern.html
Dhakal, D. (2024). AI Revolutionizing Law: How Artificial Intelligence Is Transforming The Legal Industry. North South University Law Blog. https://nsulawblog.com/2024/10/11/ai-revolutionizing-law-how-artificial-intelligence-is-transforming-the-legal-industry/
Edenberg, E. & Wood, A. (2023). Disambiguating algorithmic bias: From neutrality to justice. In Proceedings of the 2023 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, vol. 81, pp. 691–704. https://doi.org/10.1145/3600211.3604695
EU AI Act: First regulation on artificial intelligence. (2023). Topics. European Parliament. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20230601STO93804/eu-ai-act-first-regulation-on-artificial-intelligence
Feijóo, C., Kwon, Y., Bauer, J. M., Bohlin, E., Howell, B., Jain, R., Potgieter, P., Vu, K., Whalley, J., & Xia, J. (2020). Harnessing artificial intelligence (AI) to increase wellbeing for all: The case for modern technology diplomacy. Telecommunications Policy, 44(6), 101988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2020.101988
Fernando, Z. J., Kristanto, K., Anditya, A. W., Hartati, S. Y., & Baskara, A. (2023). Robot lawyer in Indonesian criminal justice system: Problems and challenges for future law enforcement. Lex Scientia Law Review, 7(2), 489–528. https://doi.org/10.15294/lesrev.v7i2.69423
Forbes. (2024). AI Legal Services: How AI Is Providing Small Businesses with Affordable Legal Help. https://www.forbes.com/sites/allbusiness/2024/01/18/ai-legal-services-how-ai-is-providing-small-%20businesses-with-affordable-legal-help/
Ford, J. (2023). Artificial Intelligence Models Aim to Forecast Eviction, Promote Renter Rights. Penn State University. https://www.psu.edu/news/information-sciences-and-technology/story/artificial-intelligence-models-aim-forecast-eviction
Garrett, B. L. & Rudin, C. (2023). Interpretable algorithmic forensics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 120, e2301842120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2301842120
Hacker, P. (2021). The European AI liability directives – Critique of a half-hearted approach and lessons for the future. Computer Law & Security Review, 51, 105871. https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.13960
Javed, K. & Li, J. (2024). Artificial intelligence in judicial adjudication: Semantic biasness classification and identification in legal judgement (SBCILJ). Heliyon, 10, e30184. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844024062157
Kevin, C. (2025). The Use of Chatbots in Providing Free Legal Guidance: Benefits and Limitations. ResearchGate. 388179232_The_Use_of_Chatbots_in_Providing_Free_Legal_Guidance_Benefits_and_Limitations
Khawaja, Z. & Bélisle-Pipon, J.-C. (2023). Your robot therapist is not your therapist: Understanding the role of AI-powered mental health chatbots. Frontiers in Digital Health, 5, 1278186. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/digital-health/articles/10.3389/fdgth.2023.1278186/full
Kruszynska, M. (2024). AI in the Legal Sector: How Can Legal Professionals Use AI & Automation? Spyrosoft. https://spyro-soft.com/blog/legal-tech/ai-in-the-legal-sector-how-can-legal-professionals-use-ai-automation
Laptev, V. A. & Feyzrakhmanova, D. R. (2024). Application of artificial intelligence in justice: Current trends and future prospects. Human-Centric Intelligent Systems, 4, 394–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44230-024-00074-2
Lee, D., Arnold, M., Srivastava, A., Plastow, K., Strelan, P., Ploeckl, F., Lekkas, D., & Palmer, E. (2024). The impact of generative AI on higher education learning and teaching: A study of educators’ perspectives. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100221
Libai, B., Bart, Y., Gensler, S., Hofacker, C. F., Kaplan, A., Kötterheinrich, K., & Kroll, E. B. (2020). Brave new world? On AI and the management of customer relationships. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 51, 44–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2020.04.002
Lohr, J. D., Maxwell, W. J., & Watts, P. (2019). Legal practitioners’ approach to regulating AI risks. In K. Yeung & M. Lodge (Eds.), Algorithmic Regulation. Oxford University Press, Oxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198838494.003.0010
MacDowell, E. L. (2015). Reimagining access to justice in the poor people’s courts. Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law & Policy, 22, 3. https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/938
Perlman, A. (2023). The Implications of ChatGPT for Legal Services and Society. Harvard Law School Center on the Legal Profession. https://clp.law.harvard.edu/article/the-implications-of-chatgpt-for-legal-services-and-society/
Securiti Research Team. (2024). Data Privacy Laws and Regulations around the World. Securiti. https://securiti.ai/privacy-laws/
Simshaw, D. (2022). Access to A.I. justice: Avoiding an inequitable two-tiered system of legal services. Yale Journal of Law & Technology, 24, 150. https://yjolt.org/sites/default/files/simshaw_-_access_to_a.i._justice.pdf
Sonday, K. (2023). Forum: There’s Potential for AI Chatbots to Increase Access to Justice. Thomson Reuters Institute, New York. https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en-us/posts/legal/forum-spring-2023-ai-chatbots/
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Diwakar Dhakal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
With the licence CC-BY, authors retain the copyright, allowing anyone to download, reuse, re-print, modify, distribute, and/or copy their contribution. The work must be properly attributed to its author.
It is not necessary to ask for further permission from the author or journal board.
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
