Thursday, May 30, 2024
Using AI and ChatGPT in legal cases: What Indian courts have said
High Courts across India have differed in their stances on using ChatGPT as part of the legal process. Where has it been used, and what are some criticisms of the practice?
The Manipur High Court last week stated that it “was compelled to do extra research through Google and ChatGPT 3.5” while deciding on a case. This is not the first time a High Court has used artificial intelligence (AI) for research. But in India — as in the rest of the world — courts have been rather cautious about the use of AI for judicial work.
How the Manipur HC used ChatGPT in a case
Zakir Hussain, 36, was “disengaged” from his district’s Village Defence Force (VDF) in January 2021, after an alleged criminal escaped from the police station while Hussain was on duty. He never received a copy of the order dismissing him.
After Hussain approached the Manipur High Court challenging his dismissal, Justice A Guneshwar Sharma, in December 2023, directed the police to submit an affidavit detailing the procedure for “disengagement of VDF personnel”. But the affidavit submitted was found wanting, and did not explain what the VDF was. This “compelled” the court to use ChatGPT for further research.
ChatGPT said that the VDF in Manipur comprises “volunteers from the local communities who are trained and equipped to guard their villages against various threats, including insurgent activities and ethnic violence” — information that Justice Sharma used in his ruling.
Ultimately, he set aside Hussain’s dismissal, citing a 2022 memorandum issued by the Manipur Home Department which stated that upon dismissal, VDF personnel must be given “an opportunity to explain in any case of alleged charges”— which the petitioner was denied in this case.
High Courts’ differing stances on using ChatGPT
In March 2023, Justice Anoop Chitkara of the Punjab & Haryana High Court used ChatGPT to deny the bail plea of a certain Jaswinder Singh, accused of assaulting an individual, and causing his death. Justice Chitkara found that there was an element of “cruelty” to the assault — a ground which can be used to deny bail.To supplement his reasoning, Justice Chitkara posed a question to ChatGPT: “What is the jurisprudence on bail when the assailants are assaulted with cruelty?” The court’s eventual order contained the AI chatbot’s three page response which included that “the judge may be less inclined to grant bail or may set the bail amount very high to ensure that the defendant appears in court and does not pose a risk to public safety.”
Justice Chitkara, however, clarified that this reference to ChatGPT was not the same as expressing an opinion on the merits of the case, and that it “is only intended to present a broader picture on bail jurisprudence, where cruelty is a factor.”
The Delhi High Court has been less receptive to the use of AI in courts. In August 2023, Justice Pratibha M Singh ruled in favour of luxury shoe designer Christian Louboutin in a trademark case.
Louboutin’s lawyers had used ChatGPT-generated responses to show that the brand had a reputation for “spike shoe style” with a “red sole” — a design which was being copied by another brand called Shutiq. Justice Singh held that ChatGPT cannot be used to decide “legal or factual issues in a court of law”, highlighting the possibility of “incorrect responses, fictional case laws, imaginative data etc. generated by AI chatbots”.
Elsewhere in the world
This ‘fictional case laws’ scenario is not a mere hypothetical. In 2023, a Manhattan federal judge fined a lawyer $5,000 for submitting fictitious legal research generated using ChatGPT. The lawyer had filed a brief with fictitious cases with titles such as Varghese vs China Southern Airlines and Shaboon vs Egypt Air in a personal injury suit involving Colombian airline Avianca.
Last December, the UK judiciary released a set of guidelines about the use of generative AI in courts. While judges were allowed to use ChatGPT for basic tasks such as summarising large bodies of text, making presentations, or composing emails, they were cautioned not to rely on AI for legal research or analysis.
No such guidelines exist in India.
Written by Ajoy Sinha Karpuram
Source: Indian Express, 28/05/24
Why do temperatures vary from place to place within the same city?
A weather station in Delhi recorded a high of 52.9 degree Celsius on May 29 — unheard of in the capital. But another station in the same city recorded 45.2 degrees, pretty normal for the end of May. Leafier neighbourhoods often seem cooler than pockets of treeless concrete. Why does this happen?
The weather station at Mungeshpur in Delhi recorded a maximum temperature of 52.9 degree Celsius on Wednesday (May 29). On Tuesday, the same location had seen a high of 49.9 degree Celsius.
However, the maximum temperatures recorded at other places in Delhi were at least 6 or 7 degree Celsius lower than those seen in Mungeshpur. For instance, at Raj Ghat and Lodhi Road, maximum temperatures on Wednesday were 45.2 and 46.2 degree Celsius respectively.
There are several weather stations across Delhi, each of which records the temperature at a particular place.
Several observatories and automatic weather stations are located at different places within the city — and there is no single observatory or station that gives an average temperature of Delhi as a whole.
Temperatures are recorded at Palam, Lodhi Road, Ridge, Ayanagar, Jafarpur, Mungeshpur, Najafgarh, Narela, Pitampura, Pusa, Mayur Vihar, and Raj Ghat.The weather/ temperature app on your mobile phone shows the temperature at the nearest station, which may not necessarily be that of the official India Meteorological Department (IMD) station. (The same goes for the AQI/ air pollution data on your phone.)
So, if you drive across the city from, say, Pitampura to Raj Ghat, you will likely see different temperatures on your phone.
But why is the temperature different at different places within the same city?
Although temperatures experienced by a particular region are largely governed by weather, several anthropogenic factors also play a role, especially in a large urban centre such as Delhi.
These factors include the concentration of pavements, buildings, roads, and parking lots — in general, hard and dry surfaces provide less shade and moisture, thereby leading to higher temperatures.
The material used to build infrastructure also has an impact. For instance, places where most of pavements and buildings are made of concrete, witness warmer temperatures. That’s because concrete can hold nearly 2,000 times as much heat as an equivalent volume of air.
The geometry and spacing of buildings are a factor as well. If a location is densely populated by buildings, surfaces and structures there become “large thermal masses” as they fail to release heat readily. Very narrow streets and tall buildings obstruct natural wind flows that generally bring temperatures down.
The heavy use of air conditioners in shopping malls and residential areas result in localised higher temperatures — ACs release an enormous amount of heat outdoors.
These factors can collectively lead to the creation of ‘urban heat islands’ at a location. These ‘islands’ experience higher temperatures relative to outlying areas.
The likelihood of a place becoming an urban heat island is higher when it does not have trees, vegetation, and water bodies. Natural landscapes bring down temperatures because they provide shade, and the processes of transpiration from plants and evaporation from water bodies produce cooling.
This cooling effect is in evidence in the vicinity of large parks or urban forests in Delhi.
Written by Alind Chauhan
Source: Indian Express, 30/05/24
Thursday, May 16, 2024
Quote of the Day May 16, 2024
“I regret not having had more time with my kids when they were growing up.”
Tina Turner
“मुझे अफ़सोस है कि मेरे बच्चे जब बड़े हो रहे थे तब मेरे पास उनके साथ गुजारने के लिए समय का अभाव था।”
टीना टर्नर
What is Climatisation of Forests?
Recently, during the 19th Session of the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF19) in New York, a significant report titled “International Forest Governance: A Critical Review of Trends, Drawbacks, and New Approaches” was released. Authored by the Science-Policy Programme (SciPol) of the International Union of Forest Research Organizations (IUFRO), it marks the first global synthesis on international forest governance in 14 years. The report exposes the rising trend of ‘climatisation’ of forests.
What is Climatisation of Forests?
Climatisation of forests refers to the trend where the emphasis has shifted primarily towards their valuation as carbon sinks, overshadowing their crucial ecological and social roles. This shift largely stems from increasing political and financial orientations aimed at carbon sequestration to combat climate issues, frequently sidelining long-term sustainability and socio-ecological justice.
Risks and Impacts
Despite some progress in reducing deforestation, particularly in tropical regions, the report has highlighted the ongoing crises such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and growing socio-economic inequalities. The commodification of forests for carbon captures not only risks perpetuating these inequalities but also potentially diminishes effective forest management practices.
Market-based Versus Non-market Approaches
Professor Constance McDermott, one of the lead authors and head of the Land, Society, and Governance programme at the ECI, highlights significant traction in market-based solutions like forest carbon trading and zero-deforestation supply chains. However, the report indicates that these approaches may exacerbate inequities and lead to unintended negative impacts on sustainable forest management. As an alternative, non-market mechanisms, including state regulation and community-led initiatives, are suggested to offer more just and effective pathways for forest governance.
Policy Recommendations
The report calls on policymakers to revalue forests beyond just carbon sinks, stressing the importance of long-term investments focused on sustainable and equitable outcomes. It recommends fostering policies that correct power imbalances among various stakeholders and ensure protection for the rights and livelihoods of resource-dependent communities.
More About Carbon sequestration
Carbon sequestration refers to the process of capturing and storing atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), one of the primary greenhouse gases contributing to climate change. This process aims to reduce the impact of carbon emissions on global warming.
Carbon sequestration can occur naturally in forests, oceans, and soil, which absorb CO2 through biological processes. Additionally, it can be engineered through technologies such as carbon capture and storage (CCS), where CO2 is removed from industrial and energy-related emissions at the source and stored underground in geological formations, preventing its release into the atmosphere.
More About Forest carbon trading
Forest Carbon Trading refers to the economic mechanism aimed at reducing carbon emissions by valuing the carbon stored in forests. It builds on the concept that forests act as carbon sinks, absorbing CO2 from the atmosphere. Through this system, companies or nations can offset their emissions by investing in forest conservation projects, effectively trading carbon credits.
Each credit represents a ton of CO2 either absorbed or not emitted. This market-driven approach incentivizes forest protection and sustainable management, thereby contributing to global climate change mitigation efforts and supporting biodiversity conservation and local communities.
More About Zero deforestation supply chains
Zero deforestation supply chains refer to the commitment by companies to eliminate deforestation from their supply chains. This involves sourcing raw materials in a manner that does not contribute to the cutting down of forests. Key commodities often targeted include palm oil, soy, beef, and timber, which are linked to significant forest loss globally.
Organizations adopting these policies work to trace and verify the origins of their commodities, enforce sustainable practices among suppliers, and often collaborate with environmental groups to achieve transparency and accountability. The goal is to promote biodiversity conservation and reduce carbon emissions while maintaining supply demands.
Nagaland Government To Form Committee to Resolve Long-Standing Naga Conflict
The government of Nagaland has announced plans to establish a Political Affairs Committee (PAC) with the overarching aim of finding a fair and inclusive solution to the pervasive Naga political issue. This decision was taken in a meeting chaired by Chief Minister Neiphiu Rio on May 9.
The Role of the PAC
The PAC will include the council of ministers and leaders from all political parties within the 14th Nagaland Legislative Assembly (NLA). As a facilitator, the primary role of the PAC will be to bring about an amicable resolution to the Naga political conflict.
Formation of Political Consultative Committees
The Parliamentary Affairs Minister, KG Kenye, has tasked Legislature Party leaders with forming “Political Consultative Committees” (PCCs). The creation will be conducted in conjunction with their representative party organisations. With renewed effort to continue the spirit of the all-party opposition-less government, the aim is to reach a broad consensus for an early and peaceful settlement to the political deadlock.
The Structure of PCCs
The number of members forming the PCCs will be determined by the size of the party legislators in the NLA. A seven-member committee will be formed for 10 MLAs and above, five-member committee for five MLAs and above, three-member committee for one MLA and above, and a convener and co-convener for Independent MLAs.
Concerns Over Stalemate
The National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN-IM) has expressed concern that should the current talks fail, there could be a return to a severe human rights situation in Nagalim. The Naga people are increasingly pressing for a conclusion to the lengthy Naga political talks. Currently, there is lingering tension between the Government of India and NSCN-IM over the contentious issue of establishing a separate flag and constitution for Nagaland – a demand which the Indian Government has rejected.
Notes: Naga political issue
The Naga political issue dates to the British colonial era, wherein Nagas claimed independence in 1947. The Naga National Council launched an armed rebellion but was subdued by the Indian government in the late 1950s. The National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN), later split into NSCN(IM) and NSCN(K) factions, continues the fight for a sovereign Nagaland. A ceasefire agreement was signed in 1997 but the issue remains unresolved. Negotiations face difficulties due to demands for a separate flag and constitution by NSCN(IM). Moreover, other Northeast Indian states object to potential territorial concessions given to Nagas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)