Public administration entities involved in the implementation and use of artificial intelligence in the justice system of Ukraine

The article is dedicated to identifying the subjects of public administration involved in the implementation and use of AI in the justice system of Ukraine. It emphasizes that the relevance of this issue lies in the need for a clear legal definition of the roles of such subjects to ensure transparency, efficiency, and legality in the digitalization of justice in Ukraine. The doctrinal understanding of the term “subjects of public administration” is analyzed, along with both narrow and broad interpretations of the concept of “public administration”. It is proposed to consider the subjects of public administration in the context of AI implementation in justice based on the broad interpretation of public administration. The constitutional principle of state power being exercised by legislative, executive, and judicial branches served as the basis for identifying relevant subjects. The legislative, oversight, and budgetary powers of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and its committees (in particular, the Committee on Legal Policy and the Committee on Digital Transformation) are reviewed. It is noted that executive authorities are responsible for shaping and implementing state policy in the field of digitalization, including the introduction of AI technologies. In this regard, the role of the Ministry of Digital Transformation, Ministry of Justice, and Ministry of Education and Science in AI implementation within Ukraine’s justice system is outlined. It is emphasized that these bodies have general-purpose powers, while the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine is specifically responsible for introducing innovations into the judicial system. The organizational and technical support for digitalization lies with the court staff, who carry out this task also in cooperation with the State Judicial Administration. Based on current legislation, the High Council of Justice and judicial self-government bodies – the Council of Judges of Ukraine and the Congress of Judges of Ukraine – are also included among the subjects of AI implementation and use in justice. Given the broad approach to defining such subjects, the article highlights the advisability of including international organizations (such as CEPEJ and CCJE) among them. Although these organizations are not direct subjects of domestic public administration, they may act as external participants or partners influencing policy and the development of standards for the implementation and use of digital technologies, including AI in justice.