Justice in Transition: AI, Gender Equality, and the Future of Courts in the E-MENA Region
On April 24, 2026, the International Association of Women Judges (IAWJ), in partnership with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), convened its second Europe–Middle East and North Africa (E-MENA) Regional Conference, to examine two forces rapidly reshaping justice systems worldwide: artificial intelligence and gender equality in judicial leadership. The event opened under the guidance of Principal Judge Ita Farrelly of the United Kingdom, who served as mediator and welcomed participants from across regions, setting the stage for a dialogue grounded in both urgency and collaboration. She emphasized that the conference’s dual focus reflected not abstract concerns, but real and immediate transformations already unfolding within courts and legal institutions.
Following her introduction, UNDP’s Giordano Segneri talked of the significance of the moment, describing artificial intelligence as a powerful and rapidly expanding force capable of transforming societies, economies, and justice systems alike. While AI offers clear opportunities to improve efficiency, expand access to justice, and support decision-making, he cautioned that without deliberate safeguards it risks reinforcing existing inequalities, particularly for women and marginalized groups. The challenge, he suggested, lies in ensuring that technological advancement remains firmly aligned with human rights principles and the rule of law.
Judge Dushana Zdravkova of Bulgaria then brought the discussion into the realm of technical innovation, presenting the European Commission-funded ADEL project, which explores how artificial intelligence can assist judicial decision-making. Using machine learning, natural language processing, and data analytics, the system can analyze large volumes of case law, extract legal arguments, identify patterns across jurisdictions, and even predict potential outcomes based on precedent. It also produces visual maps of legal reasoning and highlights key elements within judicial texts, significantly facilitating legal research. Judges involved in the project’s validation phase highlighted its usefulness in structuring complex information and supporting daily judicial work. Yet Zdravkova stressed that the system is not intended to replace judges; its outputs are non-binding, and human reasoning remains central. The project ultimately serves to demonstrate both the potential and the limits of AI in the judicial context.
Judge Eileen Roberts of Ireland followed and spoke of how AI is already being used, and misused, in real courtrooms. In response to growing reliance on AI tools, the Irish judiciary introduced formal guidelines in 2024 governing their responsible use, alongside providing judges with access to a secure internal AI platform. While these tools have proven useful, particularly in handling large volumes of legal material, Roberts highlighted emerging risks. In one notable case, a self-represented litigant relied on AI-generated submissions containing fabricated case citations and incorrect legal arguments, leading to the dismissal of the case. The decision reaffirmed that responsibility for AI-generated content lies with the user and that courts must not be misled. Roberts also pointed to broader structural implications: in document-heavy discovery processes, AI has become essential, while the rise of deepfake evidence introduces new challenges in verifying authenticity. Irish courts are exploring AI to improve efficiency—through transcription, translation, and case management systems—while remaining cautious to preserve public trust and the integrity of proceedings.
Justice Salima Rouhi of Morocco then offered a regional perspective, tracing her country’s transition from digital justice to the early stages of AI integration. She explained that Morocco’s progress did not begin with artificial intelligence, but with a sustained effort to digitize the justice system. This includes online platforms for tracking cases, electronic filing and communication systems, and the use of remote hearings during the COVID-19 pandemic. These reforms have already led to faster case processing, improved transparency, and greater accessibility for litigants. Building on this digital foundation, Morocco is now exploring how AI can assist judges in analyzing case law, identifying trends in judicial decisions, and managing caseloads more efficiently. However, Rouhi emphasized that AI must remain a complementary tool. Justice, she argued, cannot be reduced to data processing; it requires human judgment, contextual understanding, and a commitment to fairness. Morocco is currently developing national guidelines to regulate AI use, ensuring that innovation does not compromise rights or judicial independence.
UN Special Rapporteur Margaret (Meg) Satterthwaite then broadened the discussion, situating these national experiences within a global framework of human rights and judicial independence. Drawing on her report to the UN General Assembly, she noted that AI is already widely used in justice systems, often without adequate oversight. According to UNESCO data, 44 percent of judicial actors report using AI, yet only 9 percent have received formal training. This gap raises significant concerns, particularly given the known limitations of AI systems, which can produce incorrect outputs between 17 and 33 percent of the time. Meg highlighted the problem of opacity; AI systems cannot explain their reasoning in the way human judges can, as well as the risk of over-reliance leading to “judicial deskilling.” She also warned of bigger structural threats, including the potential for AI to undermine judicial independence if decision-making becomes influenced by algorithmic recommendations or controlled by external actors, including private technology companies. Despite these risks, she emphasized that AI should not be rejected outright but approached with caution: judges must remain in control, guidelines must be developed, and human oversight must be preserved at every stage.
Kavinda Deirasinghe of Global 50/50 then shifted the focus to gender equality within judicial institutions, presenting data from a comprehensive analysis of 171 organizations across the law and justice sector. Her findings revealed significant gaps between commitments and reality. Only half of the courts studied publicly commit to gender equality, and many lack transparent policies addressing fair recruitment, promotion, and workplace conditions. The data further showed that women remain underrepresented in positions of power: only 29 percent of court presidents and 36 percent of judges are women. Deirasinghe emphasized that transparency is a major issue, with much of the relevant data simply not publicly available. Perhaps most strikingly, only three courts were found to collect or report gender-disaggregated case data, limiting the ability to assess who truly has access to justice and whose voices are being heard. She argued that meaningful change requires not only increasing representation, but transforming institutional cultures and ensuring accountability through data and transparency.
Judge Sewar Alrashdan of Jordan concluded the panel by providing a national perspective on gender equality in the judiciary. She traced the evolution of women’s participation since the appointment of the first female judge in 1996, noting that women now make up 30.6 percent of the judiciary, with 293 female judges compared to 664 male judges. Women have increasingly taken on leadership roles, serving on the Judicial Council, presiding over courts, and contributing to judicial training and decision-making processes. This growing representation has strengthened public confidence in the judiciary and made courts more accessible, particularly for women seeking justice. However, Alrashdan acknowledged that significant challenges remain, including the underrepresentation of women in senior leadership positions, persistent cultural stereotypes, and structural barriers such as work-life balance and the need for more supportive workplace policies. She emphasized that achieving true equality requires not only legal reforms, but a deeper transformation of institutional culture and societal attitudes.
Judge Dr. Hessa Al-Sulaiti of Qatar then offered a thoughtful reflection on gender equality in the judiciary, drawing on her experience as the first female judge appointed in the country in 2010. She emphasized that justice is not only about the decisions issued in courtrooms, but also about who is included in shaping those decisions. While global conversations around gender equality have advanced, she noted that women’s representation still declines at higher levels of leadership, raising important questions about equal opportunities and fair career progression. She highlighted the presence of “invisible challenges,” such as demanding workloads, societal expectations, and difficulties in balancing professional and personal responsibilities, which can affect women’s advancement. At the same time, she underscored that diversity within judicial institutions strengthens the quality of decision-making, particularly in complex cases involving social and family dynamics. Reflecting on Qatar’s progress, she pointed to growing female participation in legal education and the judiciary, supported by institutional efforts and leadership commitment. However, she stressed that achieving full equality remains an ongoing process, requiring continuous reform, supportive policies, and a broader cultural shift.
Judge Gulnora Akhunova of Uzbekistan concluded the discussion by highlighting recent progress in advancing women’s roles within her country’s judiciary. Speaking as Director of the newly established Association of Women Judges of Uzbekistan, she noted that ongoing judicial reforms have led to increasing female representation, with more than 20 percent of judicial roles now held by women. Many of these women serve in positions of responsibility across different levels of the system, reflecting a gradual strengthening of gender inclusion. She emphasized the significance of the Association’s creation in February 2026, followed by a national event in Tashkent marking International Women Judges Day, as key milestones demonstrating institutional commitment. Within Uzbekistan’s social context, she explained that increasing women’s participation brings valuable perspectives to the judiciary, particularly in understanding social and community dynamics. Looking ahead, she highlighted the Association’s role in fostering professional development, strengthening international cooperation, and building on this progress to further advance inclusive and representative justice systems.
Across all interventions, a clear and consistent message emerged. Artificial intelligence is already transforming justice systems, offering powerful tools to improve efficiency and access, yet introducing risks that must be carefully managed. At the same time, progress toward gender equality, while evident, remains incomplete, particularly at the highest levels of leadership. These two themes intersect in fundamental ways, raising questions about power, representation, and the future of justice. The rule of law depends not only on technological advancement, but on preserving fairness, independence, and human judgment. Justice may benefit from an algorithms, but it must always remain, at its core, a human endeavor.