Nigeria's Adoption of Robotic Lawyers: Legal and Socio-Economic Challenges

Technological advancement has greatly enhanced the global environment, it has improved every facet of the global industry. Currently in Nigeria, the Legal Profession has taken a bold dive by incorporating the use of technology in enhancing the practice of law. However, the current innovation of robotic lawyers in most countries may seem to be consistent with their legal systems. In this regard, it suffices to opine that given the fact that Nigeria is a developing country, there are legal and socio-economic issues that may affect or truncate the adoption of a robotic lawyer in Nigeria. It is in this regard that this study adopted a hybrid method of research in ascertaining the relevance of robotic lawyers, and the legal and socio-economic issues. Questionnaires were distributed to 305 respondent residents in Nigeria. The study found that the current trend of robotic lawyers is quite impressive, however, the nomenclature of law concerning the study and practice of Law in Nigeria does not recognize a robotic lawyer. Furthermore, some socio-economic issues such as internet fraudster, unemployment, insecurity, and poor maintenance culture may pose a challenge to the adoption of a robotic lawyer in Nigeria. In this regard, it was therefore concluded and recommended that for a smooth adoption of robotic lawyers in Nigeria, there is a need for legal approval and streamlining their roles to mere advisory to a client, training of Nigerian lawyers and judges to enhance the legal profession.


Introduction
Legal practitioners are officers of the court, they proffer assistance to the court in the dispensation of justice 1 .The legal practitioner is amicus curiae, which is a friend of the court.He is an officer in the temple of justice, to help the court to do justice 2 .As a have transcended into utilizing technology in enhancing legal practice 12 .Some of these transformations include but are not limited to, virtual court proceeding, digitalise legal practice, a digital audio recording of court proceedings, and Tele-justice 13 .
The world intellectual property organisation defines artificial intelligence as an aspect of computer science aimed at developing and evolving machines and systems that can carry out tasks perceived to require human intelligence with little or no human interference.It suffices to state that AI has penetrated all professions and occupations in one way or another and the legal profession is not exempted but recently, artificial intelligence has made a remarkable change in the legal profession through the development of robot lawyers otherwise known as robotic lawyers.Robotic lawyers are attorneys who use robotics and artificial intelligence (AI) to practice law.Legal procedures like contract evaluation and document analysis are also being automated with the help of this technology.Moreover, robots are being employed to offer legal counsel, as demonstrated by the invented robot lawyer who was able to offer legal counsel on employment law.However, the robotic lawyer enabled by artificial intelligence was invented by a company name DoNotPay and was said to take its first defence of a client in court in the United States of America courtroom on February 2023.
Concerning the trend of using artificial intelligence in courtroom adjudication, it suffices to state that China has been the first to adopt and utilize artificial intelligence in its courtroom system 14 .This is concerning the fact that China had sought to adopt technology in their legal system to improve and enhance the court system in the area of the drafting of legal documents, recommending laws, and identifying human error inherent in a court ruling.In this regard, judges in Beijing's Supreme Court are allowed and encouraged to consult artificial intelligence in their dispensation of justice in every court suit within their court.However, in Nigeria, robotic lawyers are still a relatively new idea, but as technology develops, their appeal grows 15  Although it suffices to state that, while this development has been accepted and revered by some people, others seem to abhor this development but one of the controversial aspects of this is the question of whether or not a robot can be a legal practitioner in the Nigerian legal system.However, in recent times, there has been a groundbreaking invention of a robotic lawyer possessing artificial intelligence to act and execute the functions of a trained legal practitioner 16 .Although, this invention is commendable, however, several legal and socio-economic issues may arise if a robotic lawyer is introduced into the Nigerian legal profession 17 .These include; is it legally permissible for a robotic lawyer to practice as a legal practitioner in Nigeria? will the issue of confidentiality not be jeopardized when a robot is acting as legal personnel to a client.Will adopting a robotic lawyer not increase the level of unemployment and internet fraudsters 18 .
It is concerning the above, that this study tends to embark on a hybrid method of study in ascertaining the legal and socio-economic issues concerning robotic lawyers in the Nigerian legal profession.Furthermore, the study will also proffer possible solutions concerning how robotic lawyers could be relevant to the legal profession and possible ways of mitigating legal and socio-economic challenges.

Research Method
The study adopts a hybrid methodology that involves a non-doctrinal and a doctrinal study method in examining the legal and socio-economic issues of adopting a robotic lawyer in the Nigerian legal profession.The essence of using the doctrinal method is aimed at analyzing the Nigerian laws and existing literature concerning the legal framework that regulates the Nigerian profession in ascertaining if it allows for the adoption of robotic lawyers.Furthermore, it is also aimed at conceptualizing the development of a robotic lawyer.In this regard, to achieve this feat, the study place reliance on Nigerian laws regulating the legal profession and some piece of scholarly literature.Furthermore, the non-doctrinal method is further aimed at empirically ascertaining the relevance and legal and socio-economic issues that may have a negative effect on the adoption of a robotic lawyer in Nigeria.To achieve this aspect of this study, a questionnaire where distributed to various respondents who reside in the various geo-political zone in Nigeria.

Legal Framework Concerning the Legal Profession in Nigeria and Robotic Lawyers
In Nigeria, the courtrooms are considered to be a hallowed chamber of justice where legal practitioners appear to defend their clients and the judges make decisions based on the evidence presented before it and not on mere speculations or conjectures.Nigerian law is based on the ideals of equity, justice, and fairness.Its purpose is to uphold accountability in society and holds those who break the law responsible for their deeds.As a result of our absence of technical regulations that regard non-human entities as persons with rights before a court of law, however, robots cannot be held accountable or culpable by definition Paul Atagamen Aidonojie et.al (Nigeria's Adoption of Robotic Lawyers …) if something goes wrong.No doubt robotic lawyers are developing technology and innovation that could completely change the legal sector.This is concerning the fact that robotic lawyers can evaluate massive amounts of data and offer good counsel in a fraction of the time it would take a person to do so by employing artificial intelligence.However, the Nigerian legal system and its laws regulating the legal profession does not seem to permit or allow non-human entities (such as a robot) to practice or take the place of a human lawyer who has to fulfill the necessary legal requirement to practice law in Nigeria. 19ncerning the above, the legal profession in Nigeria is regulated by a body of legal framework which includes; the legal practitioners act, the rules of professional conduct, the constitution of Nigeria as well as judicial authorities.There is no precedent in Nigerian law, historically speaking, for a robotic lawyer or other AI-driven technologies to be used in courtrooms across the nation's several states.Section 1 of the Nigeria Legal Practitioner Act aptly provides that a legal practitioner according to the legal practitioner act is a person entitled by the provisions of this act to practicing as a barrister and solicitor either generally or for any particular office or proceeding.The legal profession is one of the most professional occupations in Nigeria and to become one there are certain requirements as stipulated by the Nigeria Legal Practitioner Act that must be met and they include, the candidate must study law for five years at a Nigerian university and pass all the courses stipulated by the Council of legal education in Nigeria and the candidate must obtain a certificate from the Nigerian law school by passing the Bar Examination after being ascertained by the Body of Benchers to be a "fit and proper" person.In this regard, it is required that a candidate must have made 70% physical class attendance, take internship in a law firm and Nigerian court, a written examination and participate in a two-course meal. 20e candidate must be called to the Nigerian Bar by the body of benchers.Before a person can become a legal practitioner in Nigeria, they must fulfill the above requirement, failure of which such a person may not be allowed to practice as a lawyer and represent clients in court.The robotic lawyer is not a graduate of law from any university, neither did it take the bar examinations nor was it called to the Nigerian bar by the body of bencher.In this regard, this regard, it suffices to state that a robotic lawyer does not meet any of the requirements required to be a lawyer or practice law in Nigeria.Furthermore, the Nigeria legal practitioner act is the principal act that regulates the conduct of legal practitioners.Section 2 of the legal practitioner Act provides that a person is only entitled to practice as a barrister or solicitor if the name of the person is on the roll.Although, a bar aspirant is called to the Nigerian bar and his name is enrolled in the roll of the entire lawyers in Nigeria after successfully passing the Nigeria Bar examination.In this regard, by this section, for a person to appear before the court as a barrister or solicitor in Nigeria, he or she must have his name in the roll.Concerning the provision of the Act and the decision of the court, it suffices to state that they make use of the word 'person' which means a human being conceived as an individual.In this regard, the artificial intelligence system aimed at copying a human is not considered a natural person under Nigerian law.It, therefore, means that a lawyer is not entitled to represent any client in a Nigerian court.Furthermore, section 2 of the Legal Practitioners Act further requires that all proceedings be conducted between a human legal practitioner and judge given the high level of empathy humans may have that robots may lack.This is concerning the fact that robotic lawyers can certainly not sense justice being served in front of them; only people guided by moral codes created by previous generations (and still upheld) should be allowed to sit at the bar and behind the bench during criminal trials. 22 addition, section 4(1) (a) of the Nigeria Legal Practitioners Act provides that before a bar aspirant can be called to the bar, he or she must be a Nigerian citizen.In this regard, the question that begs for an answer is "Who is a citizen in Nigeria" A citizen is a member of a country, section 25 of the Constitution of Nigeria provides for citizenship by birth, naturalization, and by marriage; the question, therefore, is what country is a robotic lawyer a citizen of A robotic lawyer does not have Nigerian citizenship and as such, it cannot be called to the bar thus, its name cannot be included in the role of lawyers and therefore, it cannot practice as a lawyer in Nigeria and form a partnership with a law firm.This is concerning the fact that Rule 5(1) of the Rules of Profession Conduct of the Nigeria Legal Practice and the Nigerian court in the case of Yesufu & Anor.v. Kupper International NV 23 has stipulated that a Nigerian lawyer is prohibited from forming a partnership with anyone not admitted to practice law in Nigeria. 24

Socio-Economic Issues Regarding Robotic Lawyers in Nigeria
No doubt robotic lawyer is an upshot and childbirth of technological development 25 , however, there several socio-economic issues that may arise concerning the adoption of a robotic lawyer.Some of these socio-economic issues include but are not limited to the following unemployment, inequality-if work is allotted to artificial intelligence, revenue will be given to fewer people, artificial error-artificial intelligence always has defects and securityartificial intelligence can be infiltrated and corrupted by viruses and other forms of malware.Concerning the data obtain or gotten from the questionnaire distributed to the various respondent resident of the various geo-political zones in Nigeria.Culture and Legal  System, 4.2 (2024), 510-37 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.53955/jhcls.v4i2.197BESTUUR  ISSN 2722-4708  Vol.12, No.1, August, 2024, pp.69-81   Paul Atagamen Aidonojie et.al (Nigeria's Adoption of Robotic Lawyers …) The study adopts the use of 305 Respondents resident in the various geo-political zones in Nigeria as its sample size in this study.In this regard, the researchers selected the respondents to respondents to respond to the questionnaire and adopt a simple random sampling technique or method.This is concerning the fact that a simple random sampling method is termed as a better method of sampling respondents27 and it possesses several potentials or relevance as argued by scholars in several pieces of research 28 as follows, that it is effective and reliable in sampling a population from a heterogeneous society or territory. 29Concerning the data obtained and presented above which focus on the relevance, legal and socio-economic in adopting robotic lawyers in the Nigerian legal profession is discussed as follows.Table 1 represent the fact that 305 of the respondents who responded to the questionnaire are residents of the various Nigerian geo-political zones.In this regard, it suffices to state that the respondents have sufficient knowledge concerning the Nigerian legal profession to give an informed and knowledgeable answer to the questions generated by this study.In this regard, 82.9% of the respondents verified that if the robotic lawyer is BESTUUR ISSN 2722-4708  Vol.12, No.1, August, 2024, pp.69-81   Paul Atagamen Aidonojie et.al (Nigeria's Adoption of Robotic Lawyers …) adopted into the Nigeria legal profession it could aid in enhancing the Nigeria legal practice.Concerning the data obtained and presented above, the respondents identify the various relevance of a robotic lawyer to the legal profession if adopted as follows; 65.7% of the respondents stated that it could aid in automating legal procedures through the use of robotic lawyers, 88.6% identify that robotic lawyers possess artificial intelligence that could aid in evaluating and analyzing contracts and document seamlessly, 41.3% stated that offering good legal counsel through high-tech artificial intelligence, 79.1% identify that robotic lawyers can evaluate massive amounts of data in a fraction of the time that it would take a person to achieve and Furthermore, 58.3% also stated that a robotic lawyer has little or no chance of being compromised as in the case of an individual Concerning the above relevance of a robotic lawyer to the Nigerian legal profession as identified by the respondents, it suffices to opine that there are also legal and socio-economic challenges that could mitigate the adoption of a robotic lawyer in Nigeria as verified by 82.2% of the respondents.
In this regard, in the respondents identify some of these legal and socio-economic issues as follows, 78.3% of the respondents stated that the introduction of a robotic lawyer could stretch the existing legal framework as our legal system does not recognise a robotic lawyer, 87.7% agreed that artificial intelligence always has defects and could be infiltrated and corrupted by viruses or malware, 45.8% identify the challenges of who will assume legal liability for the consequences of the actions of a robotic lawyer as a result of malfunctioning, 71.1% stated that robotic lawyers possess artificial intelligence that could be hacked by an internet fraudster, 62.1% stated that adopting robotic lawyers could lead to an increase in unemployment in the legal profession and furthermore, 60.5% of the respondents further identify the challenges of maintenance culture, in this regard, the inventor of a robotic lawyer may be required to provide constant maintenance as well as upgrade the software at intervals.Concerning the above challenges identified above that could mitigate the adoption of robotic lawyers to the Nigerian legal profession, it suffices to state that given the relevance and trending of digital technology in enhancing the global environment, the concept of robotic lawyers cannot be downplayed given its challenges.In this regard, to have a balance and effective adoption and use of robotic lawyers in the Nigeria legal practice, the following remedy was identified by the respondents in to cure the above defect as identified in as follows; 76.3% of the respondents stated that reviewing the existing legal framework to provide for and regulate robotic lawyers will enable the adoption of robotic BESTUUR ISSN 2722-4708  Vol.12, No.1, August, 2024, pp.69-81   Paul Atagamen Aidonojie et.al (Nigeria's Adoption of Robotic Lawyers …) lawyers in Nigeria's legal practice, 93.3% identify that robotic lawyers should only be adopted to the extent that they could provide legal advice to the judge, legal practitioner, and client of a legal practitioner, 45.5% stated that inventors should make available a seamless process for continuous maintenance and updating a robotic lawyer, 75.5% identify that strict prosecution of fraudsters involved in hacking and cyber fraud will curtail the incidence of hacking robotic lawyer and 34.8% of the respondents further stated that the inventor should invent a robotic lawyer that could for some time self-scan and permanently delete any traces of viruses and malware.
Although, their several issues, however, one major issue and challenges a robotic lawyer may face within the Nigerian legal profession is the issue of locus standi.Locus standi is a term that means the place of standing in court.It refers to the right of a person to appear in court.It pertains to when an individual has a cause of action in court and if proven to the satisfaction of the court, it entitles the claimant to relief sought against the defendant.This right lies solely with the plaintiff or the prosecutor and it may be shared amongst individuals who have the same interest and it can also be delegated to a legal practitioner of one's choice.Apart from the claimant or prosecutor as the case may be, defendants and legal practitioners, no other persons have a right of standing before the court except the judge and witnesses.In light of the aforementioned, where does one place the robot lawyer.Is it a litigant, a legal practitioner appointed by the litigant, or a witness?In this regard, it suffices to state that a robotic lawyer does not fall into the above category; therefore, a robotic lawyer can be regarded as an interloper, a busybody whom the court cannot waste precious time on.Also, one of the prominent features of the law is that it is not static.
The law is ever-evolving, diversifying, and changing.Robots only function based on what they have been programmed to know and do.The law is ever-changing and thus, how will a robot know the current position of the law if it is not updated.A robotic lawyer will require the help of a human legal practitioner to be constantly updated to keep up with the recent position of the law and this is one of the drawbacks of a robotic lawyer.Some other legal issues or challenges that may affect the robotic lawyer practicing in Nigeria also include the following, maintenancesuppliers or makers of this robotic lawyer may be required to provide constant maintenance as well as upgrade the software at intervals, who will assume liability for the consequences of the actions of a robotic lawyer as any injuries and damages caused by a malfunctioning robot must be allocated and another legal issue is that the use of robotic lawyers will bring about privacy issues for clients and the need for it to not be violated.

Conclusion
It suffices to state that the study has identified that technology has greatly enhanced the global terrain.This is concerning the fact that the trend of robotic lawyers within the global environment is a childbirth of technology.The study further identifies that, why the trend of a robotic lawyer may seem consistent with some developed countries' legal system, however, most countries' legal system it is considered and treated with disdain.For example, in Nigeria, why a robotic lawyer is considered a welcome development to the legal profession, to the extent of rendering legal assistance to lawyers and judges, however, a robotic lawyer appearing in Nigeria court is regarded as illegal and not by the legal framework that regulates the Nigeria legal profession.Furthermore, the study also identifies that assume Nigeria adopts a robotic lawyer in the legal profession, several socio-economic issues may truncate its effectiveness.These socio-economic challenges include internet fraudster, unemployment, insecurity, and poor maintenance culture.