arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

Judges-in-the-loop? Judicial involvement in human oversight of high-risk decision support systems under the EU AI Act

Isabella Banks

International Journal of Law and Information Technology2026https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eaag001article
ABDC A
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

The European Union (EU) Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) requires institutions that deploy high-risk AI systems to ensure that they are overseen by individuals with the necessary competence, training, authority, and support. Judicial institutions may look to judges who use the high-risk decision support systems they deploy to perform this oversight role. These judges are ‘in-the-loop’ in the sense that they review each output the system generates and decide whether to override, disregard, or defer to it. This article explores the implications of making judges-in-the-loop responsible for human oversight under the AI Act by assessing the unique professional responsibilities, skills, motivations, and biases they bring to the AI-supported decision-making process. It finds that the task of overseeing high-risk decision support systems is too big for judges-in-the-loop alone and proposes an alternative way of involving judges in human oversight that not only meets the AI Act’s requirements, but more reliably safeguards judicial values and fundamental rights.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eaag001

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{isabella2026,
  title        = {{Judges-in-the-loop? Judicial involvement in human oversight of high-risk decision support systems under the EU AI Act}},
  author       = {Isabella Banks},
  journal      = {International Journal of Law and Information Technology},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eaag001},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Judges-in-the-loop? Judicial involvement in human oversight of high-risk decision support systems under the EU AI Act

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.