As with my assessment of the CJC Guidelines, I have analyzed the Action Committee Guidelines with a view to promoting best practices, identifying areas for improvement, and helping to ensure safe and responsible AI adoption in high-risk institutions. First, I will provide a brief overview of the three documents published by the Action Committee. Then I will identify their strengths, including where they supplement or improve upon the CJC Guidelines. I will move on to critiquing the weak points of the Action Committee Guidelines, and conclude with a series of recommendations for future improvements.

The CJC Guidelines provide a valuable starting point for the responsible and ethical adoption of AI in Canadian courts. However, these Guidelines and similar policies need to be further developed to address the deficiencies identified in this assessment.