A comparative study of the requirements governing advocacy in artificial intelligence in Iranian and American law

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Phd Student, University of Tehran

2 University of Tehran

3 Associate Professor, University of Tehran

10.22091/diplic.2025.14287.1030

Abstract

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) has posed unprecedented challenges to
traditional legal institutions, particularly the institution of legal advocacy. Advocacy, as a
profession grounded in human personality, trust, and professional competence, faces
profound theoretical and practical questions with the introduction of non-human
technologies especially within the Iranian legal system. By contrast, the U.S. legal system,
with its pragmatic and case law–based approach, has gradually recognized the use of AI not
as an independent lawyer but as a supportive instrument in legal processes. This comparative
study examines the theoretical foundations, functional dimensions, and regulatory
requirements of AI-based advocacy within the legal frameworks of Iran and the United
States. The findings indicate that Iran’s principal challenge lies in the absence of legal
personality, independent will, and capacity for AI, whereas in the U.S, the main concerns
involve liability determination, confidentiality protection, adherence to professional
standards, and the prevention of algorithmic bias. Moreover, by analyzing ethical,
jurisprudential, and regulatory dimensions, this paper seeks to provide a comprehensive
perspective on the future of legal advocacy in the age of intelligent technologies. Ultimately,
the study elucidates the shared and divergent aspects of both systems and offers a framework
for developing legal solutions compatible with forthcoming transformations in the digital
era.

Keywords

Insights of Intellectual Property Law in Islamic Countries
Volume 1, Issue 4 - Serial Number 4
December 2025
Pages 89-103

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics