MOSCOW. June 20 (Interfax) - Artificial intelligence (AI) could help judicial qualification panels select judicial candidates and evaluate their professional and personal qualities, the Russian Council of Judges said.
"Software systems based on AI technology could help qualification panels work out a preliminary characterization for a candidate based on the data entered, and help give [them] a general idea for assessment and final conclusion, against such criteria as the candidate's professional and personal qualities, good faith and competence, and the complexity and quality of cases heard by the [candidate] judge, and others," the Council's chairman Viktor Momotov told a workshop involving heads of judicial qualification panels on Tuesday.
Given that a candidacy involves examining a wide range of factors including the quality of administering justice, whether a candidate completed military service, information on their income, assets and property liabilities, and disciplinary action, he said.
Candidates are quite often turned down not for serious breaches, but because of common errors, such as misrepresenting their income and expenses, assets, and property liabilities. This often occurs because of incorrect phrasing, typos and so on, he said.
Conflicts of interest are another widely discussed issue, he said. Neither the law on judges' status nor the Code of Judicial Ethics provides an exhaustive list of situations which prove that a judge has a personal interest leading to a conflict of interest or the risk of one arising.
"In every specific situation, it is not abstract assumptions, but real facts and relationships capable of affecting the judge's discharge of their duties that should serve as proof that they have a personal interest," Momotov said.
To ensure an independent judiciary and maintain public trust, the central government imposes specific restrictions and duties on judges, which could be summed up as a "requirement to behave with restraint," he said.
This requirement extends both to sitting and retired judges, and to whether they reveal their identity on social media or use it anonymously. A pseudonym is no reason for unethical conduct, the Council of Judges said.
Nor is a judge relieved of responsibility by a warning that a particular article reflects his personal rather than professional view, Momotov said.
"And another important aspect of maintaining the authority, honesty and dignity of the judicial profession is compliance with the norms of decency, modesty, their manner of explanation, appearance, and personal photos, which may affect the reputation of the judiciary and the future career of a judge. This also applies to a judge's family members," he said.
Young trainee judge should be very clear as to what degree of privacy would ensure safety in accordance with the Code of Judicial Ethics, and allow them to fulfill their duties of upholding the independence, impartiality and dignity of the judiciary and bolstering trust in it, Momotov said.