Tracing the Absent: Analysing a Decision of the Colombian Constitutional Court

Baškiera, Nives; Osrečak, Jadranka

doi:10.65342/door.2.1.11

DOOR, Vol. 2. No. 1., 2026.

Case report, case study

https://doi.org/10.65342/door.2.1.11

Tracing the Absent: Analysing a Decision of the Colombian Constitutional Court

Nives Baškiera
Jadranka Osrečak

Full text: croatian pdf 441 Kb

page 261-286

downloads: 34

cite

APA 6th Edition

Baškiera, N. & Osrečak, J. (2026). Tracing the Absent: Analysing a Decision of the Colombian Constitutional Court. Državno odvjetništvo otvara razgovor, 2. (1.). https://doi.org/10.65342/door.2.1.11

MLA 8th Edition

Baškiera, Nives and Jadranka Osrečak. "Tracing the Absent: Analysing a Decision of the Colombian Constitutional Court." Državno odvjetništvo otvara razgovor, vol. 2., no. 1., 2026 https://doi.org/10.65342/door.2.1.11. Accessed 25 Jul. 2026.

Chicago 17th Edition

Baškiera, Nives and Jadranka Osrečak. "Tracing the Absent: Analysing a Decision of the Colombian Constitutional Court." Državno odvjetništvo otvara razgovor 2., no. 1. https://doi.org/10.65342/door.2.1.11

Harvard

Baškiera, N., and Osrečak, J. (2026). 'Tracing the Absent: Analysing a Decision of the Colombian Constitutional Court', Državno odvjetništvo otvara razgovor, 2.(1.). https://doi.org/10.65342/door.2.1.11

Vancouver

Baškiera N, Osrečak J. Tracing the Absent: Analysing a Decision of the Colombian Constitutional Court. Državno odvjetništvo otvara razgovor [Internet]. 2026 [cited 2026 July 25];2.(1.). https://doi.org/10.65342/door.2.1.11

IEEE

N. Baškiera and J. Osrečak, "Tracing the Absent: Analysing a Decision of the Colombian Constitutional Court", Državno odvjetništvo otvara razgovor, vol.2., no. 1., 2026. [Online]. https://doi.org/10.65342/door.2.1.11

Abstract

This article analyses Decision No T-323/24 of the Constitutional Court of Colombia, delivered on 2 August 2024, in a case in which Judge Juan Manuel Padilla used ChatGPT as a supplementary tool when deciding on the violation of the constitutional rights of an autistic child. The Constitutional Court held that there had been no violation of the right of access to a court, despite the use of artificial intelligence (ChatGPT), because it was used only after the judge had already reached his decision. Nevertheless, the Colombian Constitutional Court emphasised that the principles of transparency and accountability had not been fully observed.
In that decision, the Court also ordered the adoption of guidelines for the responsible use of artificial intelligence. The decision is examined from several perspectives. From the perspective of cognitive science and neuroscience, judicial decision-making is inseparable from emotion and intuition (the unconscious), which artificial intelligence cannot replicate. It is further considered in light of the encyclical Magnifica humanitatis of Pope Leo XIV, which complements perspectives from cognitive science and neuroscience by emphasising that artificial intelligence possesses neither moral conscience, experience, nor empathy, and that its ostensibly neutral operation may reflect the biases of its creator. The analysis is rounded out by a brief survey of the UNESCO Guidelines for the use of AI systems in courts and tribunals, which likewise indicate that artificial intelligence may serve as an auxiliary tool but must never replace the judge's professional judgement.