Esther Kuisch Laroche, Director of the UNESCO Regional Office in Santiago, and Guilherme Canela, Director of UNESCO’s Division for Digital Inclusion and Policies and Digital Transformation in Paris, met with Gloria Ana Chevesich, President of the Supreme Court of Chile, on 26 October to discuss artificial intelligence within the judicial sphere.
Judicial Capacity Building and Global Exchange
During the meeting at the Supreme Court of Chile, the UNESCO representatives presented the framework of the UNESCO Global Initiative for Judges. Operating since 2013, this international effort has trained more than 39,000 judicial actors across over 160 countries. The talks centered on potential partnership avenues for mutual learning and professional development, drawing upon each institution’s distinct expertise and ongoing initiatives, alongside a mutual commitment to further analyze how artificial intelligence can benefit the legal system.
Both institutions examined prospective training programs and collaborative knowledge-sharing mechanisms. The talks directly addressed the growing presence of artificial intelligence in the judicial sphere.
“We greatly value this opportunity for dialogue with the Supreme Court of Chile, which allows us to share experiences and explore new possibilities for collaboration in an area of growing importance. At UNESCO, we hope to continue strengthening this exchange, making our international experience available while also learning from the perspectives and progress of the Chilean judiciary,” said Esther Kuisch Laroche, Director of the UNESCO Regional Office in Santiago.
Institutional Cooperation History Between UNESCO and the Chilean Judiciary
The partnership linking UNESCO and Chile’s court system originated in 2014, when the nation welcomed the 17th Ibero-American Judicial Summit, which took place in Santiago from 2 to 4 April.
In more recent times, coinciding with the 2024 World Press Freedom Day Conference, the Chilean Supreme Court organized a gathering centered on environmental offenses and the function of courts in safeguarding journalists and additional dissenting voices.
