As of 2026-09-04, 19 official documents govern AI use by lawyers, judges or litigants at international level. 9 require disclosure or certification of AI use, 7 impose an explicit verification duty, and 0 prohibit some use outright. The incident tracker records 0 incidents in this jurisdiction.
International bodies category map →
UNCITRAL WG II
UNCITRAL has no AI-in-arbitration instrument. On a 2025 Commission mandate, Working Group II held a colloquium on 16-17 February 2026 covering arbitrators' use of AI, AI in mediation and remote hearings, to inform a recommendation to the Commission's 59th session, which instead prioritised dispute resolution in the digital economy for future work.
Consultation · Permissive
2026-07-10Consultation
CoE
The first international treaty on AI, adopted 17 May 2024 and opened for signature in Vilnius on 5 September 2024. Parties must ensure AI lifecycle activities respect human rights, democracy and the rule of law, with transparency, accountability, remedies and risk assessment. As of 3 September 2026 only the EU has ratified; five ratifications are needed.
Statute · Risk classification · Disclosure
2026-05-15Proposed
LCIA
On 11 March 2026 the LCIA opened consultation on the next edition of its 2020 Arbitration Rules. Listed themes include AI disclosure and guardrails alongside digital-ready proceedings, cybersecurity and data protection. Stage 1 closed on 11 May 2026 and draft rules will be published for further comment later in 2026. The LCIA currently has no AI-specific guidance.
Consultation · Disclosure
2026-03-11Consultation
IBA ANLBS
An IBA committee compendium first published in September 2024 and updated in February 2026, surveying guidelines, ethics opinions and statutes on lawyers' professional use of AI across multilateral organisations and more than 36 jurisdictions. It is descriptive rather than prescriptive but is the broadest cross-border map of bar-level AI guidance.
Report · Permissive
2026-02-01In force
CEPEJ
Guidelines adopted 19 December 2025 by the Council of Europe's CEPEJ for courts and tribunals in its 46 member states on using generative AI. Judicial use must be transparent, AI output can never bind a judge, the right to a human judge is guaranteed, and confidential case data must be protected. They replace the February 2024 information note.
Guidance · Disclosure · Verification duty · Confidentiality
2025-12-19In force
UNESCO
Published 3 December 2025 after a global consultation, the Guidelines are UNESCO's ethical and operational framework for AI in judicial systems. Fifteen principles in five groups - human rights and equality; safety, security and accuracy; explainability, transparency and auditability; awareness and accountability; human-centred decision-making - are paired with recommendations for judicial organisations and individual judges.
Guidance · Verification duty · Confidentiality · Disclosure · Competence · Risk classification
2025-12-03In force
Ciarb
Ciarb's non-binding guideline, launched in March 2025 and updated in September 2025, in four parts: benefits and risks; general recommendations; arbitrators' powers to rule on and require disclosure of AI use; and arbitrators' own use of AI. Appendices give a template party agreement and procedural order. It adopts the OECD definition of AI.
Guidance · Disclosure · Verification duty · Confidentiality · Competence · Record-keeping
2025-09-05In force
CEPEJ
A self-assessment questionnaire adopted by CEPEJ in December 2023 and revised on 5 June 2025 that lets judicial institutions evaluate an AI tool or service against the 2018 Ethical Charter before and during deployment. It is aimed at public decision-makers procuring or building AI for courts and complements the Council of Europe's HUDERIA risk-assessment methodology.
Guidance · Risk classification · Record-keeping
2025-06-05In force
VIAC
A short non-binding note published by VIAC in April 2025 for arbitrations under the Vienna Rules 2021. Six headings cover ethical rules, non-delegation of decision-making, confidentiality, responsible and competent use, management of AI use at the case-management conference, and evidence. Arbitrators may inform parties of the AI tools they plan to use and invite comment.
Guidance · Confidentiality · Competence · Permissive
2025-04-09In force
AAA-ICDR
A two-page March 2025 note encouraging AAA-ICDR arbitrators to use AI tools within their ethical codes: verify outputs against primary sources, retain complete control over decision-making under Canon V, disclose generative-AI use when it materially affects the process or reasoning, keep confidential information out of tools without data-protection guarantees under Canon VI, and stay competent.
Guidance · Verification duty · Confidentiality · Disclosure · Competence
2025-03-01In force
SCC
Adopted by the SCC Board on 16 October 2024, this light-touch guide offers flexible, non-mandatory guidance to tribunals and participants in SCC cases. Citing the EU AI Act's high-risk classification of AI used by tribunals, it addresses confidentiality, quality through human review of outputs, integrity through disclosure of AI use, and non-delegation of arbitral decision-making.
Guidance · Confidentiality · Verification duty · Disclosure · Permissive
2024-10-16In force
IBA/CAIDP
A September 2024 IBA and CAIDP report on AI's impact on law firms, the profession and regulation, based on a survey of 210 firms of which 43 per cent had no AI policy. It recommends AI governance policies, AI-literacy training, updated ethics rules covering supervision of AI tools and disclosure of AI use, and consistent cross-border regulation.
Report · Competence · Supervision · Disclosure
2024-09-19In force
JAMS
JAMS rules and model clause for arbitrating disputes about AI systems. They are procedural rules for AI subject-matter disputes rather than guidance on participants' use of AI: JAMS proposes panelists with technical expertise, and a default AI Disputes Protective Order limits inspection of AI systems, models and training data to experts in a secured environment.
Court rule · Confidentiality · Record-keeping
2024-06-14In force
OECD
Non-binding OECD standard adopted in 2019 and revised on 3 May 2024, setting five values-based principles: inclusive growth; respect for the rule of law, human rights and democratic values including fairness and privacy; transparency and explainability; robustness, security and safety; and accountability. Its AI-system definition is used by the EU AI Act.
Policy · Permissive
2024-05-03In force
SVAMC
Published 30 April 2024, the SVAMC Guidelines are seven best-practice guidelines for parties, counsel and arbitrators using AI in international arbitration, adoptable by agreement or procedural order. They cover understanding tools, confidentiality, case-by-case disclosure, counsel's duty of competence and to verify output, AI-generated evidence, and a ban on arbitrators delegating their mandate.
Guidance · Disclosure · Confidentiality · Verification duty · Competence · Permissive
2024-04-30In force
CEPEJ
An information note issued by the Council of Europe's CEPEJ in February 2024 cautioning judges, court staff and lawyers about generative AI. It highlighted hallucinated output, confidentiality of case data and the need for human oversight. The note was superseded on 19 December 2025 by CEPEJ's formal guidelines on generative AI in courts.
Guidance · Verification duty · Confidentiality
2024-02-01Superseded
CCJE
Opinion of the Council of Europe's judges' advisory body, adopted at its 24th plenary in December 2023, on technology including AI in courts. It holds that technology must assist and not replace judicial decision-making, that judges should be involved in decisions to adopt tools, and that they should be kept up to date on technological innovation through training.
Guidance · Competence · Permissive
2023-12-01In force
UNESCO
A 2023 UNESCO capacity-building resource for judicial operators explaining how AI systems work, the risks they pose to due process and human rights, and how courts can assess them. It accompanies UNESCO's judges' MOOC on AI and the Rule of Law, which has reached thousands of judicial operators, and preceded the 2025 Guidelines.
Guidance · Competence
2023-01-01In force
CEPEJ
Adopted by CEPEJ on 3-4 December 2018, the Charter sets five principles for AI in judicial systems: respect for fundamental rights, non-discrimination, quality and security, transparency, impartiality and fairness, and use under user control. It is addressed to policy makers, legislators and justice professionals and underpins CEPEJ's later assessment tool and generative-AI guidelines.
Guidance · Permissive · Risk classification
2018-12-04In force
Descriptive reference only: this page records what each rule requires. Missing a document? Tell us.
International bodies