Advancing the Rule of Law for the Next 25 Years

The CEELI Institute looked ahead to how to continue to advance the rule of law over the next twenty-five years as it celebrated its twenty-fifth anniversary at its annual Rule of Law Symposium on June 19 in Prague. With delegates from around the world representing government, civil society, business, and academia, the day focused on the most pressing topics in the rule of law, including the changing jurisprudence on judicial communication, the emerging use of strategic litigation (and preventing SLAPPs) to defend the rule of law itself, and the growing role of AI in investigations. The Symposium’s message was clear: the CEELI Institute has made great strides in the last 25 years and must continue to evolve to remain a cornerstone of rule of law developments for the years to come.

Chief Justice Wagner on Judicial Independence and Public Trust

In his keynote address, the Right Honourable Richard Wagner, P.C., Chief Justice of Canada explained that the attacks on the rule of law are no longer coming from the shadows. Instead, they happen in plain sight and are committed by the people who hold the greatest power.

He stated, “To withstand the storm, our institutions depend on the rule of law and judicial independence. That means judges being free to decide cases without fear or favour. Free from political pressure. Free from economic pressure. And yes, free from public pressure. While the law must evolve with society, courts must not bend to the mood of the moment.”

Nevertheless, the Right Honourable Richard Wagner, P.C., Chief Justice of Canada, came with a message of hope. He described the significant efforts Canada has made to ensure important judicial decisions are accessible to the public and that judges remain free in their decision-making.

He applauded the CEELI Institute for its involvement in protecting these democratic necessities, saying, “The CEELI Institute shows what is possible when people come together with purpose, commitment, and courage to defend shared values and strong institutions.” He observed that although the challenges facing the rule of law today are serious, so too is the determination of those working to address them, including the participants of the Symposium

Judicial Communication as a Rule of Law Necessity

Session 1 “Speaking Up for the Rule of Law: Judicial Communication” described the similar issues faced by judiciaries across jurisdictions on three continents and the actions currently being undertaken to promote judicial independence. Historically, judges have been encouraged to speak through their decisions and to limit direct communication with the public. However, declining public trust in democratic institutions, including the judiciary, has led to growing public expectations for greater transparency and more direct engagement, as people want to see and hear more from their judicial systems.

There is, therefore, an emerging paradigm where judicial communication is not an option, but a necessity. Positive engagement with the public is essential for judicial legitimacy because people tend to believe what they see firsthand. However, in light of the rise in personal attacks on judges that erode public confidence in the judiciary, the panels concluded and showcased that the era of courts communicating solely through their judgments has come to an end.

Instead, judiciaries must look for ways to more effectively communicate with the public. The participants highlighted the importance of the CEELI Institute’s “Guidelines on Judicial Communication with the Public and the Media” publication, finding it particularly helpful in giving judges a framework to apply certain media strategies. These frameworks include best practices for public communications strategies and how judiciaries can combat misinformation or disinformation.

With only 17% of people subscribing to a traditional news source, judges are increasingly thinking creatively about how to get vital information about the importance of the rule of law in the lives of ordinary citizens. For example, one panelist mentioned how Singapore uses WhatsApp to deliver quick and simplified decision summaries while South Korea promotes education on current judicial issues. Additionally, another panelist explained how they use AI tools to make easily shareable and understandable videos explaining major judicial decisions. As the first discussion came to a close, the panelists stressed that in order to protect the rule of law, judges must be transparent and accountable, and effective communication is necessary.

Confronting SLAPPs and Protecting Public Participation

The second session of the day, “Litigating for Rule of Law: Strategic Litigation and SLAPPS,” addressed the evolving role of strategic litigation in defending the rule of law itself, not simply a particular issue or individual case. When carried out strategically, it can set the stage for future victories. However, as one panelist noted, in countries already experiencing severe democratic backsliding, the outcomes of strategic litigation may not be recognized or implemented, resulting in little or no short-term change. Despite this fact, the panelists remained adamant that strategic litigation is an effective approach as it establishes powerful legal precedents and shifts public opinion. There have been numerous successes in many social issues in the last few years because of strategic litigation, highlighting it as a useful tool when advocating for future policy reform.

On the opposite side of the litigation spectrum are SLAPP cases, or Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. Through these abusive legal actions, journalists can be silenced because of the immense financial burdens associated with frivolous lawsuits. For example, Daphne Caruana Galizia, a Maltese anti-corruption advocate and journalist, was facing 48 libel suits at the time of her assassination. In one case, the subject of one of her articles filed a different lawsuit for nearly every sentence of the single article, forcing her to spend so much time and money on combatting the suits that she was effectively prevented from doing her job. [OV1]  Nonetheless,some relief is on the way. The European Union passed an Anti-SLAPP Directive, representing a significant step towards preventing such abusive claims. So far, ten countries have implemented the Directive into their national laws (with news of Poland’s successful implementation coming during the Symposium itself), with another fifteen countries in progress.

 [OV1]; nonetheless,

Artificial Intelligence in Investigations: Promise, Risk, and Human Oversight

Session 3, "The Future is Now: Artificial Intelligence in Investigations", examined the expanding role of AI in investigations. Panelists noted that, despite what we might think, AI has long been part of the legal profession, beginning with predictive coding and algorithmic tools more than 15 years ago, before evolving into deep learning and, most recently, generative AI.

One expert described how AI can prove very helpful when filtering evidence and how it can help investigators find crucial information faster. It was highlighted that never before in history could a person talk to a machine as if it were a human, providing more context wherever necessary. He told a story about an investigator asking a chatbot to sift through thousands of pages of communication to see if there was any inappropriate behavior, such as asking for someone to turn a blind eye to corruption or bypass due diligence procedures. What would have taken hours of human labor was finished within a few minutes. The panelist described the process as having an imaginary friend who can time-travel through the documents to figure out what truly happened.

Another panelist observed that some AI systems remain difficult even for technical experts to fully explain. The key question is, can we validate their accuracy? While AI is already revolutionizing investigations, it remains necessary for humans to diligently check its results.

Another panelist addressed the risks that AI poses to investigations, including data privacy, confidentiality concerns, and the worry that no one fully understands how large language models work. He concluded that the best way to combat these potential dangers is to rethink how we evaluate workflow models so that a human can evaluate them at every stage of the process. Otherwise, we run the risk of allowing the machine to develop in the wrong direction and “run away from you.”

The AI revolution has already arrived, and the CEELI Institute is looking ahead to anticipate emerging challenges to the rule of law and proactively address the risks they present.

Looking Ahead to CEELI’s Next 25 Years

As the panels concluded, the audience had the chance to hear from Homer Moyer and Dr. Mark Ellis as they described both the origins of the CEELI Institute and how they saw the Institute developing over the next twenty-five years.

The original goal was to support countries in the region in pursuing democratic institutions after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Today, two-thirds of those countries are in the upper half of global rule of law indexes, showing that, despite there being ongoing challenges to democratic governance, immense progress has been made.

The CEELI Institute has evolved over the last 25 years, touching on pressing issues of today, including judicial communication, strategic litigation, SLAPPs, and AI use. As the most relevant issues change, the CEELI Institute will continue adapting to best serve the needs of democratic governments.