The Role of AI in Arbitration Proceeding in Chile

AI can significantly aid arbitrators by streamlining evidence management and case analysis. Arbitration often involves large volumes of data, and AI tools can help systematise, classify, and analyse this information efficiently. AI can also assist with transcriptions, audio-visual processing, and administrative tasks such as issuing procedural notifications. These capabilities enhance the speed and accuracy of arbitration processes.

However, Agosin emphasises that AI should serve as a supportive tool rather than replace human judgment. Some procedural decisions, such as verifying the validity of a power of attorney, can be automated, but final rulings and complex legal judgments should always involve human oversight. In jurisdictions such as China, AI is already used to generate case resolutions, but these decisions must be reviewed and approved by human judges.

AI has the potential to improve arbitrator selection by conducting more thorough conflict-of-interest checks. Currently, appointing arbitration panels can be a lengthy process due to unforeseen conflicts that arise after selection. AI can accelerate this by scanning databases to detect potential conflicts more comprehensively and efficiently. While it cannot eliminate all risks, it can help avoid many common delays and disputes over arbitrator neutrality.

One of the key concerns Agosin raises is the challenge of maintaining confidentiality in arbitration when using AI. Arbitration is often chosen over litigation precisely because it offers privacy. However, AI tools frequently operate on cloud-based platforms, raising concerns about data security and unauthorised third-party access.

To mitigate these risks, Agosin suggests three key measures:

Agosin also discusses AI’s potential role in conciliation and dispute resolution. While human arbitrators play a crucial role in guiding settlement discussions, AI can provide valuable insights by analysing market trends, case precedents, and potential settlement options. AI-generated suggestions could help arbitrators propose creative solutions that might not be immediately obvious. However, she stresses that the final negotiation process should remain human-led.

Looking at Chile’s arbitration landscape, Agosin notes that AI adoption is still in its early stages. While some law firms and institutions are experimenting with AI, there is little regulatory guidance on its use in arbitration. She emphasises the need for clear procedural rules governing AI usage in arbitration cases, ensuring that AI is integrated responsibly while safeguarding confidentiality and procedural fairness.

Agosin views AI as an invaluable tool that can enhance arbitration’s efficiency, impartiality, and case management. However, she underscores the importance of maintaining human oversight, particularly in decision-making and confidentiality. As AI continues to evolve, she hopes the legal sector will embrace it as a friend rather than a threat.