Reflections on my journey in using Information Technology to support Legal Decision Making—from Legal Positivism to Legal Realism

John Zeleznikow   | Bio
Victoria University
Share:

Abstract

In this paper I discuss my transition from legal positivism to legal realism and how this has impacted upon my construction of legal decision support systems. As a child living with parents who were heavily engaged in politics, and who had disastrous experiences with the twin evils of fascism and communism, I was encouraged to become a scientist. But my interest was always in law and politics. Constructing legal decision support systems was a pragmatic balance between my skills and interests. So I began constructing rule-based systems. But gradually I became aware of the discretionary nature of legal decision making and the need to model legal realism. Through the use of machine learning I have been able to develop useful systems modelling discretion. The advent of the world wide web has allowed the wider community to become more aware of legal decision making. It has fostered the concept of online dispute resolution and provided tools for self-represented litigants. Most importantly, we have become aware that the major impediment to the use of technology in law is not the lack of adequate software. Rather it is the failure of the legal profession to address user centric issues.

 

References

  1. Abawajy, J., Kelarev, A. V. and Zeleznikow, J. 2013. “Centroid sets with largest weight in Munn semirings for data mining applications.” Semigroup Forum, 87: 617--626.
  2. Abedi, F, and Zeleznikow, J. 2019. “Developing Regulatory Standards for the Concept of Security in Online Dispute Resolution Systems.” Computer Law & Security Review: The International Journal of Technology Law and Practice, Accepted on 14 January 2019.
  3. Abedi, F., Zeleznikow, J., Bellucci, E. 2019. “Universal Standards for the Concept of Trust in Online Dispute Resolution Systems in E-Commerce Disputes.” International Journal of Law and Information Technology, Oxford University Press, Accepted on 6 December 2018.
  4. Abrahams, B., Bellucci, E., and Zeleznikow, J. 2012. “Incorporating Fairness into Development of an Integrated Multi-agent Online Dispute Resolution Environment.” Group Decision and Negotiation, 21 (1): 3-28.
  5. Bellucci, E., Zeleznikow, J. 2006. “Developing Negotiation Decision Support Systems that support mediators: a case study of the Family_Winner system.” Journal of Artificial intelligence and Law, 13 (2): 233-271.
  6. Berman, D.H., Hafner, C.D., 1989. “The potential of artificial intelligence to help solve the crisis in our legal system.” Communications of the ACM, 32 (8): 928-938.
  7. Brams, S. J., Taylor, A. D., 1996. Fair Division, from cake cutting to dispute resolution. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  8. Condliffe, P., Zeleznikow, J. 2014. “What process do disputants want? An experiment in disputant preferences.” Monash University Law Review, 40 (2): 305-339.
  9. Ebner, N. and Zeleznikow, J. 2015. "Fairness, Trust and Security in Online Dispute Resolution." Hamline University's School of Law's Journal of Public Law and Policy, 36 (2): Article 6. http://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/jplp/vol36/iss2/6
  10. Ebner, N. and Zeleznikow, J. 2016. “No Sheriff in Town: Governance for the ODR Field.” Negotiation Journal, 32 (4): 297-323.
  11. Fisher, R. and Ury, W. 1981. Getting to YES: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Boston: Haughton Mifflin.
  12. Galanter, M. 2004. “The vanishing trial: An examination of trials and related matters in federal and state courts.” Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 1 (3): 459-570.
  13. Hall, M. J. J., Calabro, D., Sourdin, T., Stranieri, A. and Zeleznikow, J. 2005. “Supporting discretionary decision making with information technology: a case study in the criminal sentencing jurisdiction.” University of Ottawa Law and Technology Journal, 2 (1): 1-36.
  14. Hall, M. J. J., Stranieri, A. and Zeleznikow, J. 2002. “A Strategy for Evaluating Web-Based Discretionary Decision Support Systems.” Proceedings of ADBIS2002 - Sixth East-European Conference on Advances in Databases and Information Systems, 2002. Bratislava, Slovak Republic: Slovak University of Technology. September 8-11, pp. 108-120.
  15. Hannah, J., Richardson, J, and Zeleznikow, J. 1980. “Completely semisimple ring-semigroups.” J. Austral. Math. Soc. (Series A), 30:150-156.
  16. Hunter, D., Tyree, A. and Zeleznikow, J. 1993. “There is less to this argument than meets the eye.” Journal of Law and Information Science, 4 (1): 46-64.
  17. Hunter, D. and Zeleznikow, J. 1994. “An overview of some reasoning formalisms as applied to law.” Think, 3: 24-40.
  18. Kannai, R., Schild, U. and Zeleznikow, J. 2007. “Modeling the evolution of legal discretion – an Artificial Intelligence Approach.” Ratio Juris, 20 (4) December: 530–558.
  19. Lodder, A.R. 1999. Dialaw: On Legal Justification and Dialogical Models of Argumentation. Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  20. Lodder, A. and Zeleznikow, J. 2005. “Developing an Online Dispute Resolution Environment: Dialogue Tools and Negotiation Systems in a Three Step Model.” The Harvard Negotiation Law Review, 10: 287-338.
  21. Lodder, A. and Zeleznikow, J. 2010. Enhanced Dispute Resolution through the use of Information Technology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  22. Nash, J., 1951. “Non-cooperative games.” Annals of mathematics, 54 (2): 286-295.
  23. Nash, J. 1953. “Two Person Cooperative Games.” Econometrica, 21: 128-140.
  24. Quinlan, J.R. 1986. “Induction of decision trees.” Machine learning, 1 (1): 81-106.
  25. Sergot, M.J., Sadri, F., Kowalski, R.A., Kriwaczek, F., Hammond, P. and Cory, H.T. 1986. “The British Nationality Act as a logic program.” Communications of the ACM, 29 (5): 370-386.
  26. Stranieri, A. and Zeleznikow, J. 2005. Knowledge Discovery from Legal Databases, Volume 69, Dordrecht: Springer Law and Philosophy Library.
  27. Stranieri, A., Zeleznikow, J., Gawler, M. and Lewis, B. 1999. “A hybrid—neural approach to the automation of legal reasoning in the discretionary domain of family law in Australia.” Artificial intelligence and Law, 7 (2-3): 153-183.
  28. Thiessen, E. M. and McMahon, J. P. 2000. “Beyond Win-Win in Cyberspace.” Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, 15 (3): 643-667.
  29. Toulmin, S.E., 1958. The use of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  30. Vossos, G., Zeleznikow, J. and Hunter, D. 1993. “Building intelligent litigation support tools through the integration of rule based and case-based reasoning.” Law, Computers and Artificial intelligence, 2 (1): 77-93.
  31. Walton, R. E. and Mckersie, R. B. 1965. A Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiations. New York: McGraw – Hill.
  32. Zable, A., 2003. Cafe Scheherazade. Melbourne: Text Publishing.
  33. Zeleznikow, 1979. On regular semigroups, semirings and rings. Phd thesis, Faculty of Science, Monash University, Australia.
  34. Zeleznikow, J. 1980. “Orthodox Semirings and Rings.” J. Austral. Math. Soc. (Series A), 30: 50-54.
  35. Zeleznikow, J. 1981. “Regular Semirings.” Semigroup Forum, 23: 119-136.
  36. Zeleznikow, J. 1984. “Regular ring-semigroups.” Commentationes Mathematicae, Universitaes Carolinae, 25 (1): 129-141.
  37. Zeleznikow, J. 1991. “Building intelligent legal tools—The IKBALS project.” Journal of Law and Information Science, 2 (2):165-184.
  38. Zeleznikow, J. 2002. “Using Web-based Legal Decision Support Systems to Improve Access to Justice.” Information and Communications Technology Law, 11 (1): 15-33.
  39. Zeleznikow, J. 2003. “An Australian Perspective on Research and Development required for the construction of applied Legal Decision Support Systems.” Artificial Intelligence and Law, 10: 237-260.
  40. Zeleznikow, J. 2011. “Life at the end of the world was an anti-climax – memories of sixty years of life of a Jewish Partisan in Melbourne.” Holocaust Studies: A Journal of Culture and History, 16 (3): 11–32.
  41. Zeleznikow, J. 2014. “Comparing the Israel – Palestinian dispute to Australian Family Mediation.” Group Decision and Negotiation Journal, 23 (6): 1301–1317.
  42. Zeleznikow, J. and Bellucci, E. 2012. “Legal Fairness in Alternative Dispute Resolution Processes – Implications for Research and Teaching.” Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal, 23 (4): 265-273.
  43. Zeleznikow, J. and Hunter, D. 1994. Building Intelligent Legal Information Systems: Knowledge Representation and Reasoning in Law, Amsterdam: Kluwer Computer/Law Series, 13.
  44. Zeleznikow, J. and Hunter, D. 1992. “Rationales for the continued development of legal expert systems.” Journal of Law and Information Science, 3: 94-110.
  45. Zeleznikow, J. and Hunter, D. 1995. “Reasoning paradigms in legal decision support systems.” Intelligence Review, 9 (6): 361-385.
  46. Zeleznikow, J. and Hunter, D. 1995. “Deductive, Inductive and Analogical Reasoning in Legal Decision Support Systems.” Law, Computers and Artificial Intelligence, 4 (2): 141-160.
  47. Zeleznikow, J., Vossos, G. and Hunter, D. 1994. “The IKBALS project: Multimodal reasoning in legal knowledge-based systems.” Artificial Intelligence and Law, 2 (3):169-203.
How to Cite
1.
Zeleznikow J. Reflections on my journey in using Information Technology to support Legal Decision Making—from Legal Positivism to Legal Realism. LiC [Internet]. 2019Aug.12 [cited 2020Apr.7];36(1):80-2. Available from: https://journals.latrobe.edu.au/index.php/law-in-context/article/view/89

Send mail to Author


Send Cancel