This concluding chapter affirms that the integration of AI into courts is no longer a question of if, but how. Courts, as constitutional institutions, face profound normative questions: how does AI affect transparency, impartiality, and public trust? While AI improves court operations in many jurisdictions, it also risks eroding judicial values and the rule of law. Global examples show diverse adoption paths, yet shared challenges, such as AI opacity, lack of judicial AI literacy, and accountability gaps, demand coordinated oversight. Ultimately, a human-centred approach to judicial AI is essential. Rather than rejecting AI or accepting it uncritically, the authors advocate a balanced path that preserves the human and interpretive role of judging.

Judicial systems, long considered the most tradition-bound of public institutions, are at a critical juncture. From Strasbourg to São Paulo, from Delhi to Wellington, courts around the globe confront a shared challenge: how to navigate justice in an era redefined by artificial intelligence (AI). The question is no longer whether courts will engage with AI – but how, and on whose terms. This Handbook is the first global and comparative volume that systematically examines the use of AI and digital technologies in courts. It provides an interdisciplinary and cross-jurisdictional perspective on how judicial institutions are responding to the opportunities and risks posed by AI – from e-filing systems and predictive tools to ‘robo-judging’ and AI- supported decision-making. The forty-five contributions of the Handbook are arranged across ‘Part I: AI and Courts: Context and Normative Positions’, ‘Part II: AI and Courts: Disciplinary Perspectives’, ‘Part III: AI & Tech Challenges to Judicial Values’, and ‘Part IV: AI in Courts across the Globe: Jurisdictional Perspectives’, with each part offering a distinct analytical lens on justice and judging in the age of AI. The Handbook examines not just what AI can do for courts, but also what courts must do to ensure AI enhances, rather than erodes, their fundamental role in democratic societies.

Chapter 1 revisits the establishment of the League of Nations by providing an in-depth analysis of the Paris Peace Conference, with a particular focus on the negotiation of the Covenant. The chapter also explores alternative conceptualizations of order from the social sciences, law, and history. The chapter argues that the new international order constituted by the League exhibited three common characteristics. Firstly, the League was largely shaped by the dominance of the United States and Britain during the negotiations. Secondly, the core decisional logic of the League’s institutional system was political, not legal. Thirdly, the League constituted a dual international order. On the one hand, and despite its universal rhetoric, it reproduced an imperial logic by dividing countries into civilized and uncivilized ones in new ways. However, in an attempt to prevent another world war, it also sought to facilitate disarmament and collective security, primarily in Europe. In doing so, it helped stabilize the European state system by addressing several key challenges, such as the status of Danzig, the Saar and Upper Silesia, and the protection of national minorities.

Chapter 2 focuses on the early history of the League Secretariat’s Legal Section, offering a rich sociography of the first craftsmen and women responsible for the League’s legal affairs, including later famous personalities such as Åke Hammarskjöld and Georges Kaeckenbeeck. It uncovers attempts by the Dutch Director of the Legal Section, Joost van Hamel, to push for a strengthening of international law with the aim of consolidating the position and competences of the League of Nations. The Legal Section thus promoted the establishment of a Permanent Court of International Justice with compulsory jurisdiction that should be closely linked to the League, a comprehensive programme for the codification of international law, and the obligatory registration of international treaties. However, Van Hamel’s campaigns met with resistance from leadership of the League Secretariat in the shape of Secretary-General Eric Drummond, who, assisted by Under-Secretary-General Dionisio Anzilotti, focused on not antagonizing the great powers in a situation where the League Secretariat was still relatively weak.

In recent years, the Brazilian judiciary has announced over 100 initiatives using artificial intelligence (AI) systems, while a mounting number of juridical decisions shape how AI can be used in the country. The chapter analyses how AI impacts the Brazilian judiciary. First, we introduce the Brazilian legal systems, and explore a selection of AI initiatives to expose their benefits and shortcomings. Then we proceed to examine the policy for the usage of AI within courts in the country, focusing on the recent Resolution of the Brazilian National Council of Justice, aimed at regulating the judiciary’s production and use of AI systems. Last, we argue that the integration of AI within Brazil’s judiciary has the potential to enhance procedural efficiency and innovation. Yet, we emphasise that the guarantee of transparency, accountability, legal certainty, and digital sovereignty largely depend on the adoption and coherent implementation of a new AI Regulatory Framework and a new AI Strategy.

This chapter surveys developments related to the use of generative AI in courts in the United States. It discusses a range of current uses of generative AI by judges, lawyers, and ordinary citizens, and explains commonly cited concerns that these uses raise, such as worries about inaccuracy and bias, as well as newly emerging concerns. The chapter also surveys efforts to regulate these tools in the US, such as judicial bans and requirements of disclosure and certification.

The evolution of AI presents both challenges and opportunities for courts. To date, most discussion and examination of AI and courts has focused on decision-making tools, reflecting a broader trend in discourse around courts that unduly centres on courts’ adjudicatory functions. Yet courts perform a far wider set of functions and societal roles. This chapter examines the current and potential uses of AI, questions of suitability and ethics, and the challenges and opportunities that arise through this broader consideration of what it is courts actually do, beyond determining disputes. While AI may enhance access to justice, reduce costs, save time, and potentially improve the quality of justice, significant challenges arise, including the potential erosion of judicial respect, inaccuracy, and concerns for the separation of powers. Crucially, court users and the public ought to be more widely consulted in how AI is developed and deployed for courts to achieve better, fairer, and more effective justice.

Ever since the earliest Arabic writings on medicine we meet treatises on widespread illnesses or crowd diseases, including epidemics. Some of those works discuss the causes and treatment; others deal with the treatment only. This paper is limited to the works that deal with environmental pollution as a cause of such illnesses. They cover subjects like air and water contamination, solid waste mishandling and environmental assessments of certain localities. The treatises reviewed are those written by (1) al-Kindi, (2) Qusta b. Luqa, (3) alRazi, (4) Ibn al-Jazzar, (5) al-Tamimi, (6) Abu Sahl al-Masihi, (7) Ibn Sina, (8) Ali b. Ridwan, (9) Ibn Jumay’, (10) Ya’qub al-Isra’ili, (11) Abdullatif alBaghdadi, (12) Ibn al-Quff and (13) Ibn al-Nafis. Studying the contents of each work shows which authors were merely copying the Greek theory of humours and miasma, and which made genuine contributions to the field. The period covered in the paper is up to the end of the thirteenth century A.D. This is because the Black Death took place in the fourteenth century, and encouraged several authors of that time to write about epidemics and plagues. Other contemporary researchers have studied these later works.

The present chapter attempts a comparative analysis of three different legal systems and their approaches to environmental law, contributing to the extensive literature on this area of law in numerous areas of the world such as the United States, Europe, and the Middle East. However, that literature appears to have had little coverage of the treatment of environmental law in Islamic law, one of the three main global legal systems together with common and civil law. The bold spread of Islamic tendency in the Middle East that followed the so-called “Arab Spring” assures major changes in the political and economic sphere, including environmental and natural resource levels. Environmental threats are very pressing all over the world, as the Earth needs to be protected through the adoption of universally applicable legal rules and the right to a healthy environment needs to be elaborated on in international instruments. Man’s position in the universe is premised on two principles: the stewardship of man which means that man is not only a creature but also God’s khalifa (steward) on earth.

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems are used in court to analyse legal data, cite case law, evaluate and generate evidence, or support judges with prediction. As technological advancements enter the courtroom, assessing their impact on core judicial values is crucial. This chapter asks whether AI undermines procedural fairness in judicial decision-making. To address this question, it first presents procedural fairness as a normative concept studied across different disciplines. It shows why procedural fairness matters and what values fair procedures aim to foster. Drawing on case studies and scholarly work, it then illustrates how AI systems may impair these values. It then investigates how regulatory attempts and ethical frameworks for AI in judicial systems aim to address the resulting issues by analysing fundamental principles of technology regulation. The main argument of the chapter is that AI regulation must be complemented by specific procedural rules tailored to the judicial domain. In the age of AI, fair procedures should realise participation, increase trust, preserve neutrality, and provide mechanisms to detect errors in AI systems.

Chapter 7 examines how the German Foreign Office (Auswärtiges Amt, AA) strategically engaged with scholarly international law between 1920 and 1925 to challenge the post-Versailles international order. Drawing on extensive archival research, it explores how the AA mobilized legal scholars, subsidized international law publications and institutes, and sought to exploit the legal framework established by the League of Nations as a double-edged sword – originally designed to serve the Entente, yet also capable of inflicting damage on its wielder. The study demonstrates that the AA covertly collaborated with international law scholars as informants and agents and actively sought to influence international legal discourse – as seen, for example, in the case of the Hague Academy of International Law. It highlights the AA’s increasing sophistication in navigating within the newly formed Versailles system of international law. Ultimately, the study reveals a deeply entangled relationship between diplomacy and academia, suggesting that international law was not merely a normative framework but an instrument of statecraft in German foreign policy, weaponized in the service of national interests under the guise of academic independence.

Al-Mizan: A Covenant for the Earth was completed which is led by United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) under the umbrella of Faith-Based Organizations and is contributed by Muslim thought leaders worldwide. The covenant reminds that responsibility of humanity, especially Muslim communities, is on climate change and is to project natural resources and biological variety of world’s common heritage. Moreover, the covenant emphasizes that it is a sacred aim that humanity must respect the natural balance in accordance with values that establish the fundamental of Islam.

This chapter focuses on the present and potential uses of artificial intelligence (AI) in Turkey's court system, including non-judicial tasks. Although Türkiye lacks sophisticated AI applications in a strict technical sense, the National Judiciary Informatics System (UYAP) has modernised judicial processes by digitising legal proceedings. While this system enhances accessibility and efficiency, the Turkish Constitutional Court and the Court of Cassation are exploring more advanced AI models. These courts are leveraging AI for tasks such as case classification, decision support, and reducing backlog.

Islamic legal scholarship is split on the permissibility of corporate personhood. While some scholars advocate unequivocal permissibility, others are critical because Islamic law prohibits limited liability in most contracts. The religion also regards the human being as the only subject of Divine command. Despite their differences, most jurists agree that the corporate form is an effective tool to mobilize large amounts of capital. However, only one scholar, Ahmad Ali Abdullah addresses the exploitative impact corporations have on human rights and the environment. In this context, I argue that we should address the issue of corporate personhood from a maqasid framework. The preservation and protection of wealth is a legitimate purpose of Islamic law. However, the preservation and protection of life is a higher purpose in the hierarchy. The preservation of life is directly linked to the preservation of the earth. While recognizing the corporate form’s utility, I advocate creating alternative business models that lead to more sustainable development.