Skip to content
© Copyright, Judicial Appointments Commission 2026.

The JAC’s artificial intelligence guidance

Published:

This guidance statement sets expectations on candidates’ acceptable use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools within the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) selection process. It aims to maintain the integrity and fairness of the appointment process whilst supporting responsible use of AI in candidate applications. 

Permissible use of AI 

It is acceptable in some limited circumstances to use AI when applying for judicial appointment. The JAC considers that AI may be used by candidates when drafting and reviewing self-assessment or individual skill and ability examples, provided the individual remains fully responsible for the accuracy and truthfulness of all material submitted. 

We would consider acceptable uses to include: 

  • improving grammar, clarity and structure of self‑written examples 
  • identifying key themes or strengths in the content already written 
  • assessing a self‑authored draft for coherence and identifying narrative gaps 
  • summarising long documents that the candidate has personally authored 

AI can be used to enhance readability and structure but must not create substantive content or replace or inaccurately overstate personal experience. 

Prohibited use of AI 

Use of AI in qualifying tests is expressly prohibited. 

AI must not be used within self-assessment of skills and abilities examples to: 

  • invent examples of judicial, legal, or professional experience 
  • fabricate or embellish personal roles, responsibilities, achievements or outcomes 
  • rewrite or enhance genuine experience in a way that misrepresents the true level of competence or expertise 

All examples provided for selection purposes must be entirely authentic and derived from the individual’s own experience. 

AI tools must not be used in any capacity to: 

  • draft, generate, or refine answers in qualifying tests, selection days, and other live assessments 
  • produce responses for situational judgement or critical analysis tests, nor scenario‑based assessments, or other written tasks 
  • provide the candidate with suggested solutions, explanations, or interpretations of legal or factual questions 
  • assist with decision‑making during any timed or supervised assessment or interview 
  • no selection material should be entered into any AI tool 

Our assessment tools are designed to evaluate a candidate’s analysis of information, independent reasoning, judgement, and integrity. The use of AI to provide assistance in these situations therefore undermines their purpose as selection tools. 

Candidate responsibility and integrity 

Candidates applying for judicial appointment remain responsible for: 

  • ensuring this guidance is followed at all times during the selection process 
  • ensuring the accuracy and honesty of all evidence, including statements and examples 

The Judicial Appointments Commission takes very seriously the integrity of the selection process and any evidence that a candidate has breached this policy will be considered an integrity issue. This might result in disqualification from this and future exercises, and referral to your relevant professional regulatory body. 

If you have any questions or queries about this guidance, please contact us to discuss further.