Moderator: Samantha Masengeli, MCIArb
Panellists: Quency Otieno, Moses Muchiri
The session opened with a compelling question from the moderator, Samantha Masengeli: “Will artificial intelligence (AI) replace or complement us?” This sparked a dynamic and engaging discussion. Most delegates believed AI would serve as a complement to human involvement rather than a replacement.
However, Ms. Jacqueline Waihenya, Chairperson of CIArb Kenya, presented a differing viewpoint. She referenced ChatGPT-4, an advanced AI system capable of analyzing facial expressions, to suggest that AI might eventually replace humans in specific roles. Adding a nuanced layer to the debate, the Chairperson of the Africa Arbitration Association proposed that AI could act both as a complement and a replacement its impact depending largely on the context and domain of application. This perspective acknowledged the complex and dual nature of AI’s integration into society, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of its benefits and potential risks.
As the discussion evolved, it became increasingly clear that integrating AI into various sectors would require a balanced approach one that weighs enhanced efficiency and capabilities against ethical concerns and the preservation of human judgment.
Quency Otieno
In his presentation, Quency Otieno addressed common misconceptions surrounding AI. He began by clarifying that AI is essentially a simulation of human intelligence not a conscious, autonomous being. He emphasized the resource-intensive nature of training AI systems, highlighting the vast time and energy required to develop them.
Quency also explained the various types of data used in training AI, including synthetic, real-time, and auto-generated datasets. He asserted that due to the inherent complexity and current limitations of AI, it is unlikely to replace human beings in the near future.
Moderator Samantha posed a thought-provoking question: “Can an algorithm truly go off on its own and develop a mind of its own, making decisions not based on the data it was trained on?” Quency responded that this was not possible. He emphasized that AI systems operate within strict parameters, intentionally designed to prevent overreach beyond their intended scope.
Tackling popular fears of a robot-dominated future, Quency noted:
“Considering the vast global population, replacing every human with a robot or AI system would demand an immense amount of energy and resources making such a scenario highly improbable in the foreseeable future.”
On the application of AI in Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), Quency acknowledged the growing interest in using AI to assist in arbitration. He pointed out that while AI tools can generate arbitral awards and assist in procedural steps, ethical considerations must guide their use. He stressed the importance of transparency arbitrators should disclose their intent to use AI tools and seek explicit consent from the parties involved. Alternatively, parties may proactively authorize the use of specific AI systems. This, he said, is essential to preserve fairness and trust in the ADR process.
Jonathan Woods, Global Chair of CIArb, raised an important concern: the difficulty AI faces in evaluating witness credibility. He noted that core functions of arbitration such as assessing factual accuracy and resolving contradictions in testimony still require human judgment. AI, he concluded, lacks the capability to make nuanced credibility assessments.
Moses Muchiri
Moses Muchiri shared insights into the use of AI in online dispute resolution (ODR), citing eBay’s effective system for resolving minor consumer disputes as a positive example. He highlighted AI’s potential to reduce costs and improve the speed of dispute resolution.
However, Moses cautioned against over-reliance on AI, warning of the erosion of authenticity. He remarked:
“People who use AI will replace people who don’t. Alternatively, authentic individuals those who can critically evaluate information will be more relevant than those who blindly rely on AI outputs.”
Referencing the OECD AI principles, Moses emphasized the importance of subject matter expertise as a foundation for using AI tools effectively.
“Develop a deep understanding of your field first,” he advised. “Only then can you responsibly and powerfully leverage AI, while maintaining essential critical thinking skills.”
In conclusion, Moses addressed the ethical dimensions of AI use, particularly the risk of “hallucinations” or the generation of false information by AI systems. He underscored the importance of consulting with human professionals and senior experts to validate information, rather than depending solely on AI-generated outputs.
