Hybrid Judicial Legitimacy in the Algorithmic Era: Toward a Socio-Legal Theory of Human–AI Adjudication Across Legal Traditions

Andreas Yotam Wanggai; Ahmad Firdaus; Maria Lourdes Santos

doi:10.70716/justin.v2i2.392

Authors

Andreas Yotam Wanggai Master of Law, Cendrawasih Univrsity, Indonesia
Ahmad Firdaus Master of Law, Universiti Malaya, Malaysia
Maria Lourdes Santos Master of Law, University of the Philippines Diliman, Philippines

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70716/justin.v2i2.392

Keywords:

Hybrid Judicial Legitimacy, Human–AI Adjudication, Algorithmic Accountability, Procedural Justice, Comparative Legal Traditions

Abstract

The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into judicial systems has transformed traditional conceptions of adjudication, legal authority, and judicial legitimacy. While existing scholarship has extensively examined algorithmic accountability, explainability, and the ethical implications of AI-assisted decision-making, limited attention has been devoted to understanding how judicial legitimacy is reconstructed when adjudicative authority is shared between human judges and algorithmic systems. This article addresses that gap by developing a socio-legal theory of hybrid judicial legitimacy across diverse legal traditions. Employing a comparative socio-legal and theory-building methodology, the study analyzes legal, sociological, and governance literature concerning AI-assisted adjudication, procedural justice, rule of law, and comparative legal traditions. The findings demonstrate that judicial legitimacy in the algorithmic era can no longer be grounded solely in judicial authority or procedural fairness. Instead, legitimacy increasingly depends on the interaction among human judicial discretion, procedural justice guarantees, and algorithmic accountability mechanisms. Based on this analysis, the article proposes the Hybrid Judicial Legitimacy Model (HJLM), a theoretical framework that explains how legitimacy can be sustained within AI-assisted courts while preserving legal authority and public trust. The article contributes to contemporary law studies by reconceptualizing legitimacy as a multidimensional socio-legal construct that integrates human judgment and algorithmic governance within emerging forms of digital justice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abramson, J. (2024). Artificial justice: The hidden costs of AI in law. Harvard University Press.

Araujo, T., Helberger, N., Kruikemeier, S., & de Vreese, C. H. (2020). In AI we trust? Perceptions about automated decision-making by artificial intelligence. AI & Society, 35(3), 611-623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-019-00931-w

Ashley, K. D. (2017). Artificial intelligence and legal analytics: New tools for law practice in the digital age. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316761380

Barak, A. (1989). Judicial discretion. Yale University Press.

Barysė, D., & Sarel, R. (2023). Algorithms in the court: Does it matter which part of the judicial decision-making is automated? Artificial Intelligence and Law, 31(4), 525-553. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-022-09343-6

Benyekhlef, K. (2021). Artificial intelligence and justice: An international perspective. LexisNexis Canada.

Cath, C., Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2018). Artificial intelligence and the ‘good society’: The US, EU, and UK approach. Science and Engineering Ethics, 24(2), 505-528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9901-7

Celeste, E., Heldt, A., & Keller, F. J. (Eds.). (2022). The Oxford handbook of digital constitutionalism. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198869818.001.0001

Citron, D. K. (2008). Technological due process. Washington University Law Review, 85(6), 1249-1313.

Contini, F., & Cordella, A. (2015). Digitalizing public services: Understanding the impact of ICT on judicial systems. Government Information Quarterly, 32(4), 451–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.09.005

Cotterrell, R. (2021). Sociological perspectives on law (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Deflem, M. (2019). Law and society (2nd ed.). Polity Press.

Dignum, V. (2019). Responsible artificial intelligence: How to develop and use AI in a responsible way. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30371-6

Dworkin, R. (1986). Law's empire. Harvard University Press.

European Commission. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act). Official Journal of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu

Finder, S. (2021). Artificial intelligence and China’s courts. Supreme People's Court Monitor. https://supremepeoplescourtmonitor.com

Floridi, L., Cowls, J., King, T. C., & Taddeo, M. (2020). How to design AI for social good: Seven essential factors. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(3), 1771-1796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00213-5

Gibson, J. L. (2021). Judging legitimacy. Annual Review of Political Science, 24, 353-375. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-050317-070612

Glenn, H. P. (2024). Legal traditions of the world: Sustainable diversity in law (6th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. MIT Press.

Hildebrandt, M. (2020). Law for computer scientists and other folk. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198860877.001.0001

Holmes, O. W., Jr. (1897). The path of the law. Harvard Law Review, 10(8), 457-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/1322028

Katsh, E., & Rabinovich-Einy, O. (2017). Digital justice: Technology and the internet of disputes. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190464585.001.0001

Kolkman, D., Bex, F., Narayan, N., & van der Put, M. (2024). Justitia ex machina: The impact of AI systems on legal decision-making and discretionary authority. Big Data & Society, 11(2), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517241255101

Kroll, J. A., Huey, J., Barocas, S., Felten, E. W., Reidenberg, J. R., Robinson, D. G., & Yu, H. (2017). Accountable algorithms. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 165(3), 633-705.

Leslie, D., Burr, C., Aitken, M., Katell, M., Briggs, M., & Powell, R. (2022). A human rights, democracy, and rule of law assurance framework for AI systems. AI and Ethics, 2(4), 659-680. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-021-00116-0

Liu, C., & Chen, Y. (2022). Smart courts and judicial modernization in China: Challenges and opportunities. Asian Journal of Law and Society, 9(3), 523–543. https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2022.14

Liu, J. Z., & Jia, H. (2026). AI penalty in judicial reasoning: Indistinguishable from human, devalued when revealed. Digital Society, 5(1), 1-20.

McBride, N., & Simon, F. (2024). Human oversight and accountability in AI-assisted adjudication. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 32(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-023-09367-8

Micklitz, H.-W., Pollicino, O., Reichman, A., & Simoncini, A. (Eds.). (2024). Constitutional challenges in the algorithmic society. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009321051

Mittelstadt, B. D., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S., & Floridi, L. (2016). The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, 3(2), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716679679

Morison, J., & Harkens, A. (2019). Re-engineering justice? Robot judges, computerised courts and (semi) automated legal decision-making. Legal Studies, 39(4), 618–635. https://doi.org/10.1017/lst.2019.5

OECD. (2024). OECD framework for the classification of AI systems. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org

Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Harvard University Press.

Raz, J. (2009). The authority of law: Essays on law and morality (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Scherer, M. U. (2016). Regulating artificial intelligence systems: Risks, challenges, competencies, and strategies. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 29(2), 353–400.

Shikhelman, V. (2026). Judging by algorithm? Artificial intelligence and the legitimacy of international adjudication. Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 17(1), 1-27.

Smuha, N. A. (2021). Beyond a human rights-based approach to AI governance. Philosophy & Technology, 34(3), 477–493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00403-w

Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571-610. https://doi.org/10.2307/258788

Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. R. (2003). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law & Society Review, 37(3), 513-548. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5893.3703002

Surden, H. (2019). Artificial intelligence and law: An overview. Georgia State University Law Review, 35(4), 1305–1334.

Susskind, R. (2019). Online courts and the future of justice. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198838364.001.0001

Susskind, R., & Susskind, D. (2015). The future of the professions: How technology will transform the work of human experts. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198713395.001.0001

Tamanaha, B. Z. (2004). On the rule of law: History, politics, theory. Cambridge University Press.

Tyler, T. R. (2006). Why people obey the law (2nd ed.). Princeton University Press.

Tyler, T. R. (2007). Legitimacy and criminal justice: International perspectives. Russell Sage Foundation.

UNESCO. (2021). Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. UNESCO Publishing. https://unesdoc.unesco.org

Veale, M., Van Kleek, M., & Binns, R. (2018). Fairness and accountability design needs for algorithmic support in high-stakes public sector decision-making. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174014

Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., & Floridi, L. (2017). Why a right to explanation of automated decision-making does not exist in the General Data Protection Regulation. International Data Privacy Law, 7(2), 76-99. https://doi.org/10.1093/idpl/ipx005

Waldron, J. (2023). The rule of law and the governance of artificial intelligence. Oxford University Press.

Walsh, T. (2022). Machines behaving badly: The morality of AI. Black Inc.

Yeung, K. (2018). Algorithmic regulation: A critical interrogation. Regulation & Governance, 12(4), 505-523. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12158

Zarsky, T. Z. (2016). The trouble with algorithmic decisions: An analytic road map to examine efficiency and fairness in automated and opaque decision making. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 41(1), 118-132. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243915605575

Zerilli, J., Knott, A., Maclaurin, J., & Gavaghan, C. (2019). Transparency in algorithmic and human decision-making: Is there a double standard? Philosophy & Technology, 32(4), 661–683. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-018-0330-6

Zhang, M. (2023). Judicial artificial intelligence and smart courts in China: Implications for global legal systems. Computer Law & Security Review, 49, 105803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2023.105803

Zouridis, S., van Eck, M., & Bovens, M. (2020). Automated discretion and the rule of law. Utrecht Law Review, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.36633/ulr.560

Zweigert, K., & Kötz, H. (1998). An introduction to comparative law (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.