Digital transaction law traditionally relies on centralized trust service providers. However, the emergence of blockchain and artificial intelligence introduces decentralized and autonomous transaction systems that challenge existing legal frameworks of trust, accountability, and evidence. This study employs a techno-legal doctrinal and comparative methodology to examine whether blockchain architecture can functionally align with legally defined trust services under electronic transaction frameworks in Jordan, Algeria, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and the European Union (eIDAS). The analysis demonstrates that blockchain can fulfill several core trust service functions, particularly data integrity preservation and reliable timestamping, but remains incompatible with qualified trust services where legal frameworks require centralized certification and formally recognized identity infrastructures. To address this regulatory gap, the study proposes a rebuttable presumption framework in which blockchain records establish prima facie evidence of transactional integrity in AI-mediated transactions, supported by a layered liability model that allocates responsibility among developers, system operators, and application-level actors.
Alghathian et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: