Invisible Threads of Judicial Dialogue: From Customary Law to AI-Assisted Network Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46282/bpf.2025.50Keywords:
artificial intelligence, customary international law, judicial dialogue, network analysis, comparative lawAbstract
The paper explores the potential of AI and network analysis in identifying customary international law through the study of judicial dialogue. It begins with a discussion of traditional approaches based on the state practice and opinio iuris, which are increasingly challenged by the growing volume and fragmentation of international law sources. The paper analyses the limits of current methods as well as the criticism of the ILC. In this context, it evaluates the opportunities offered by AI tools for processing extensive body of text, identifying citation networks among international courts, and uncovering patterns of legal reasoning. The paper highlights that integrating AI tools into traditional legal research can provide a complementary perspective on the process of custom crystallising, particularly through the visualization of relationships between decisions and the tracing of both implicit and explicit influences. At the same time, it emphasizes the need for methodological caution, since the quality of outputs depends on the representativeness of data, and the interpretation of the legal context cannot be fully replaced by algorithms. The aim of the paper is to contribute to the discussion on innovative interdisciplinary methodologies that combine legal research with the analytical capacities of AI, thereby enriching comparative legal scholarship.
References
1. ANGHIE, Antony: Rethinking International Law: A TWAIL Retrospective. In: European Journal of International Law, roč. 34, č. 1 (2023), s. 7–112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chad005
2. BOBEK, Michal: Comparative Reasoning in European Supreme Courts. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199680382.001.0001
3. CASIS, Rommel: Re-customizing Customary International Law. In: The Philippine Yearbook of International Law, roč. 18, (2019), s. 1–36.
4. DE BRABANDERE, Eric: The use of precedent and external case law by the International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. In: The Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, roč. 15, č. 1 (2016), s. 24–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341311
5. ESĽP vo veci Verein Klimaseniorinnen schweiz and others proti Švajčiarsku, č. 53600/20, 09. apríl 2024.
6. FOBBE, Sean: Introducing twin corpora of decisions for the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ). In: Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, roč. 19, č. 2 (2022), s. 491–524. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12313
7. FORTUNA, Marina et al. (eds.): Customary International Law and Its Interpretation by International Courts: Theories, Methods and Interactions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009541312
8. FOWLER, James et al. Network analysis and the law: Measuring the legal importance of Supreme Court precedents. In: Political Analysis, roč. 15, č. 3 (2007), s. 324–364. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpm011
9. GELTER, Martin – SIEMS, Mathias: Language, Legal Origins, and Culture Before the Courts: Cross-Citations between Supreme Courts in Europe. In: Supreme Court Economic Review, roč. 21, č. 1 (2013), s. 215–269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/675270
10. GELTER, Martin – SIEMS, Mathias. Networks, Dialogue or One-Way Traffic? An Empirical Analysis of Cross-Citations Between Ten of Europe’s Highest Courts. In: ANDENAS, Mads – FAIRGRIEVE, Duncan: Courts and Comparative Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198735335.003.0011
11. HERNANDEZ, Gleider: On multilingualism and the international legal process. In: Select proceedings of the European Society of International Law (2010), s. 441–460.
12. JESSUP, Philip C.: Transnational Law. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1956.
13. KAMMERHOFER, Jörg: Customary International Law and Some of Its Problems. In: European Journal of International Law, roč. 15, č. 3 (2004), s. 523–553. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/15.3.523
14. KISCHEL, Uwe: Comparative Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198791355.001.0001
15. LANDO, Massimo: Secret Custom or the Impact of Judicial Deliberations on the Identification of Customary International Law. In: Cambridge Law Journal, roč. 81, č. 3 (2022), s. 550–580. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197322000253
16. MARCOS, Henrique: From Fragmented Legal Order to Globalised Legal System: Towards a Framework of General Principles for the Consistency of International Law. In: Athena – Critical Inquiries in Law, Philosophy and Globalization, roč. 3, č. 1 (2023), s. 90–124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4502218
17. MEDVEDEVA, Masha – VOLS, Michel – WIELING, Martijn: Using Machine Learning to Predict Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. In: Artificial Intelligence and Law, roč. 28, č. 2 (2020), s. 237–266. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-019-09255-y
18. MOHAMMADI, Mohammad et al. Combining topic modelling and citation network analysis to study case law from the European Court on Human Rights on the right to respect for private and family life. In Artificial Intelligence and Law (2025), s. 1–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-025-09471-9
19. NOLTE, Georg: How to Identify Customary International Law? – On the Final Outcome of the Work of the International Law Commission (2018). In: KFG Working Paper Series, No. 37, Berlin Potsdam Research Group “The International Rule of Law – Rise or Decline?”,2019, s. 1–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3402384
20. PICKER, Colin: International Law's Mixed Heritage: A Common/Civil Law Jurisdiction. In: Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, roč. 41, č. 4 (2008), s. 1083–1140.
21. (Re)Searching for SWAIL. Part I: An Interview with Patryk Labuda and Marek Jan Wasiński, dostupné na: https://voelkerrechtsblog.org/researching-for-swail-part-i/.
22. (Re)Searching for SWAIL. Part II: An Interview with Patryk Labuda and Marek Jan Wasiński, dostupné na: https://voelkerrechtsblog.org/researching-for-swail-part-ii/.
23. ROBERTS, Anthea: Comparative International Law? The Role of National Courts in Creating and Enforcing International Law. In: International and Comparative Law Quarterly, roč. 60, č. 1 (2011), s. 57–92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589310000679
24. RUIZ-DOLZ, Ramon – KIKTEVA, Zlata – LAWRENCE, John: Mining Complex Patterns of Argumentative Reasoning in Natural Language Dialogue. In: Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), 2025, s. 7421–7435. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.acl-long.368
25. SANDHOLTZ, Wayne: Human rights courts and global constitutionalism: Coordination through judicial dialogue. In: Global Constitutionalism, roč. 10, č. 3 (2021), s. 439–464. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045381720000064
26. SHAHABUDDEEN, Mohamed: Precedent in the World Court. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511720840
27. SIEMS, Mathias M. The end of comparative law. In: Journal of Comparative Law, roč.2, č. 2 (2007), s. 133–150.
28. THIRLWAY, Hugh: The Sources of International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198841814.001.0001
29. VAN KUPPEVELT, Dafne – DIJCK, Gijs – GELDERS, Dave. Purposes and Challenges of Legal Network Analysis on Case Law. In: WHALEN, Ryan (ed.). Computational Legal Studies: The Promise and Challenge of Data-driven Legal Research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788977456.00017
30. WOOD, Michael – SENDER, Omri: Identification of Customary International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198848226.001.0001
31. ZHANG, Gechuan – NULTY, Paul – LILLIS, David: Enhancing legal argument mining with domain pre-training and neural networks. In: Journal of Data Mining and Digital Humanities (2022), s. 1–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46298/jdmdh.9147
32. ZIMMERMANN, Andreas et al. (eds): The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Igor Hron
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
