A team of researchers in Cambridge has found that judges in Ireland are increasingly relying on Wikipedia articles to reach their judgements. However, this entails dangers.
Camebridge – In Germany, judges are completely independent and are only bound by the laws of the Federal Republic to ensure that they judge impartially and objectively. This independence also means a high degree of personal responsibility. The most time-consuming part of a judge’s job, however, is working through files, summoning witnesses and researching details.
The “Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory” (CSAIL) at the renowned Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge has now identified a problematic methodology among some judges in Ireland: more and more are citing Wikipedia in their decisions. For the study, a group of law students produced over 150 articles on decisions by the country’s Supreme Court. Half of these were randomly selected and uploaded where judges and attorneys could use them. The rest were kept offline as a control group.
According to study: Language of Wikipedia articles was reflected in judges’ verdict
Researchers at MIT CSAIL in Cambridge found that Irish court judges were increasingly turning to Wikipedia, rather than specialist services, to research precedents for their judgement. The legal decisions were particularly influenced when there are articles on relevant cases, reports t3n.de. If there was a Wikipedia entry on a precedent, the number of citations increased by more than 20 percent in the judgment of the court based on it, explained the CSAIL.
When the judges were supported in their arguments by the article, the increase in citations was even more pronounced. The language of the Wikipedia articles was also partly reflected in the decisions. This method of judgment is questionable because there is no guarantee on Wikipedia that the representation is always correct. There is therefore a risk that judges will base their judgments on erroneous articles. It is even more dangerous when entries are manipulated in order to influence the outcome of a procedure.
Search in online databases much faster than in specialist services
Normally, judges research in specialist services for their arguments. However, online searches in free sources are of course much faster and easier than in complex legal databases. According to lead researcher Neil Thompson, the study also has to bear in mind that there aren’t nearly as many Wikipedia entries on the case law of the Irish Supreme Court in Ireland as there are on that of the US Supreme Court, for example. For example, how if this shows limits to the environmental authority.
The decisions of the higher courts are important because they are binding on those below. The CSAIL team explains that the increasingly full court schedule could also be a reason for the increased search in Wikipedia, as there is a trend towards ever faster processing of individual cases. This year, for example, it became known that more and more judges in Baden-Württemberg are sending offenders to the penitentiary system. However, the researchers strongly advise checking whether online analysis is both comprehensive and expertly sourced.
