International Development Law Organization

IDLO considers that the first Global Dialogue will be a success if it produces outcomes that are both substantively meaningful and institutionally durable. Concretely, a successful Dialogue would deliver a Co-Chairs' summary that authentically reflects multi-stakeholder perspectives including those of States, international and intergovernmental organisations, justice actors, legal and regulatory professionals, and communities most at risk of being marginalized by digitalization processes, and recognizes recognition that effective AI governance requires legal frameworks, accountable institutions, remedies, and implementation support for developing countries. A successful Dialogue should also integrate the legal and institutional dimensions of AI governance across the thematic clusters and discussions, consistent with the Secretary-General's reminder that "the rule of law must exist in the digital sphere as it does in the physical world." Equally important, success would mean tangible foundations for continued cooperation by surfacing concrete partnership opportunities required for effective digital transformation and by establishing a participatory model can be carried forward and deepened at the 2027 session in New York and beyond.

Protection and promotion of human rights

IDLO's mandate is to promote the rule of law for peace and sustainable development. Our experience across 18 countries shows that the adoption of digital technologies must be grounded in the rule of law to ensure they are rights-based and carefully designed to prevent new forms of inequality. Frontier technologies, such as artificial intelligence, must be developed and implemented with a focus on human rights and people-centered justice. From IDLO's perspective, it is crucial to establish clear legal and policy frameworks for technology use, promote digital empowerment by enhancing access and literacy for vulnerable populations, and foster multidisciplinary approaches to data governance.The Dialogue cannot be advanced by technical or policy communities alone. It requires the active engagement of justice actors, legal and regulatory professionals, and national human rights institutions, alongside Governments, industry, civil society and academia. IDLO is committed to contributing to this work, drawing on its experience in developing legal frameworks, building judicial capacity, supporting the digitalization of justice systems, and training legal and justice professionals to ensure that AI serves as a tool for human rights protection rather than a source of new inequalities.

From IDLO's perspective, the most important cross-cutting issue is the rule of law. IDLO encourages the integration of the rule of law across thematic clusters and discussions as well as reflection on the rule of law across the plenary and thematic segments during the Dialogue in Geneva and beyond. For example, AI opportunities and implications, should include consideration of the legal dimensions of AI, alongside societal, cultural and economic aspects. The legal dimensions of AI such as encompassing legal, procedural and policy frameworks, access to remedies, and the institutional capacities to apply them, are relevant not only to human rights, transparency and oversight, but equally to opportunities, economic benefits, bridging AI divides, and the development of safe, secure and trustworthy systems. Integration of the rule of law would help ensure that AI governance discussions remain grounded in the principles that must exist in the digital sphere as they do in the physical world and would bring coherence across the thematic discussions and the Co-Chairs' summary. A closely related issue is the need to understand capacity-building more broadly. Capacity building should be understood, not only in technical terms, but also as encompassing the legal and regulatory capacities required to support effective digital transformation within public institutions and service delivery contexts. This includes supporting the development and practical application of appropriate legal, procedural, and policy frameworks, ensuring that digital solutions are implemented in a people-centered, rights-aware, and context-responsive manner. It also involves training legal and justice professionals, supporting the digitalization of court processes and judicial services to enhance efficiency, transparency, and accessibility, and equipping justice actors to effectively use digital tools, with the aim of improving, rather than hindering, access to justice, particularly for those who are most vulnerable and marginalized by digitalization processes.

As an intergovernmental organization working on the rule of law and access to justice, IDLO's observations on this question are sectoral and global, centred on how AI is being deployed within and around justice institutions across the countries in which we work. The accelerating adoption of AI and digital systems in the justice sector is often outpacing the legal, regulatory and institutional frameworks needed to ensure these technologies protect and promote human rights. Across the countries in which IDLO works, we observe recurring challenges: AI systems—such as those used for automated case allocation, predictive policing, decision-support tools, and biometric identification—risk embedding and automating existing biases and entrenching structural inequalities, including those based on gender; digital divides in connectivity, geography, language and literacy exacerbate the justice gap and leave the most vulnerable further behind; public justice systems are becoming increasingly dependent on proprietary technologies supplied by a small number of private actors, raising concerns about accountability, transparency and the private capture of public services; and effective remedies and enforcement mechanisms are often absent when AI-related harms occur. At the same time, AI presents real opportunities when grounded in the rule of law. IDLO's experience shows that well-designed digital innovations can strengthen access to justice, for instance through e-filing, case management, virtual hearings and notification systems that make justice services more accessible, particularly to rural, women and marginalized users, and enhance transparency and anti-corruption within public institutions. Realizing these opportunities requires sustained investment in the legal and regulatory capacities of public institutions, training of legal and justice professionals, the development of public digital infrastructure for justice delivery, and clear legal and policy frameworks, including rule-of-law red lines on the use of AI within judiciaries themselves.

In IDLO's view, the AI Dialogue is uniquely placed to advance international cooperation on AI governance in three mutually reinforcing ways. First, as an inclusive United Nations platform, the Dialogue can bring coherence and interoperability to an AI governance landscape that is currently fragmented across multiple initiatives, processes and fora. By connecting these efforts, the Dialogue can help reduce duplication, support mutual understanding across different approaches, and anchor international cooperation. It can also serve as a global platform for sharing national approaches, good practices, lessons learned and challenges in AI governance, enabling peer exchange across different legal traditions and levels of development. Second, the Dialogue can ensure that international cooperation on AI governance is genuinely multi-stakeholder and grounded in diverse expertise. The value of the discussions will depend, in large part, on who is included in the discourse. Meaningful cooperation requires the engagement not only of Governments, industry, academia and the technical community, but also of justice actors, legal and regulatory professionals, national human rights institutions, and representatives of communities most at risk of being marginalized by digitalization processes. The Dialogue's multi-stakeholder format and the co-chairing of thematic sessions set an important precedent for how cooperation on AI should be structured. Third, the Dialogue can help situate AI governance within the broader framework of the rule of law, consistent with the Secretary-General's reminder that "the rule of law must exist in the digital sphere as it does in the physical world." By integrating the legal and institutional dimensions of AI governance across its thematic clusters, the Dialogue can help ensure that international cooperation advances rights-based, people-centred and context-responsive approaches to AI.

The AI Dialogue should build upon and connect with already existing global and regional legal and policy frameworks on AI. The added value lies in connecting these efforts through implementation support—helping translate commitments into reality, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where capacity gaps are most acute.

The value of the AI Dialogue will depend, in large part, on who is included in the discourse. Different stakeholders bring distinct expertise, and the format should enable each to contribute meaningfully: Governments by sharing national approaches, good practices and challenges; the technical community and industry by informing discussions with operational insight; civil society and affected communities by highlighting lived experiences and risks; and justice actors, legal and regulatory professionals, and national human rights institutions by bringing the legal and institutional dimensions of AI governance into the conversation. A more meaningful multi-stakeholder format of the Dialogue can be achieved by adopting a structure that allows, among others, the co-chairing of thematic sessions and discussions by Member States and relevant stakeholders, as well as opportunities for stakeholders to intervene in high-level segments. This format should be maintained and deepened in subsequent iterations, with attention to balanced representation across regions, sectors and professional communities. Side events can also further broaden participation.

IDLO encourages the participation of diverse stakeholders. These include justice actors such as judges, prosecutors, bailiffs, legal aid providers and bar associations, who are increasingly on the receiving end of AI deployment within public institutions but rarely present in global AI governance fora. National human rights institutions, ombuds bodies and accountability mechanisms are similarly underrepresented, despite their central role in ensuring access to remedies when AI systems cause harm. Inclusion of these voices requires deliberate effort, and IDLO stands ready to contribute by sharing the lessons learned and expertise it has developed on the use of technology in the justice sector across the many countries in which it works.

IDLO encourages the co-chairing of the thematic discussions by a Member State and a relevant stakeholder. This could be complemented by moderated roundtables that bring together Governments, technical experts and practitioners from underrepresented constituencies, including justice actors and legal and regulatory professionals, to work through specific governance challenges together. Scene-setting interventions by members of the Independent International Scientific Panel and other experts can help ground discussions in shared evidence, while structured peer-exchange formats would enable States to share national approaches, good practices, lessons learned and challenges across different legal traditions and levels of development. Equally important, sufficient time and opportunities should be allowed for different stakeholders to intervene during the high-level segments. The Dialogue could also benefit from formats that connect AI governance discussions with ongoing practical work, for example, sessions that showcase concrete experiences of rights-based AI deployment in public institutions, justice systems and service delivery contexts, and that draw out transferable lessons.

IDLO's experience offers practical examples of rights-based approaches to digital transformation in the justice sector, with lessons that are transferable to broader AI governance. Concrete practices include the development of integrated case management systems and e-filing platforms that enhance transparency, reduce corruption risks and simplify access for court users, as implemented with the Judiciary in Kenya; SMS-based notification systems that bridge communication gaps between courts and justice seekers; the introduction of audio-visual transcription and automated court information systems in Kyrgyzstan, supported by a tailored legal environment; and electronic public service centres in Ukraine, designed with appropriate legal frameworks and data exchange safeguards to reduce corruption and improve service delivery. In Tunisia, a digital marketplace supporting women survivors of gender-based violence was developed alongside data-protection measures to ensure rights-compatible implementation. Across these examples, several approaches consistently support effective governance. First, grounding digital and AI solutions in clear legal, procedural and policy frameworks. Second, prioritizing equity together with efficiency, with deliberate attention to digital divides, gender and the needs of marginalized users. Third, investing in public digital infrastructure and the in-house capacity of public institutions, rather than fostering dependence on proprietary technologies supplied by a small number of private actors. Fourth, training legal and justice professionals like judges, prosecutors, bailiffs, legal aid providers, to use digital tools in ways that improve access to justice. Fifth, inclusive policy-making to ensure that technologies are people-centered. Finally, adopting a proactive, context-specific policy approach, including rule-of-law red lines on the use of AI in judicial settings and long-term planning beyond initial project cycles. IDLO remains available to further share these and other experiences and meaningfully contribute to the Dialogue's discussions.