{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-14T15:02:04.063Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"lawyers","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"core","evidence":"","year":"2025","response":"","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":4,"coverage":{"cases":4,"countries":1,"languages":2,"unknownLocation":3,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":0,"regulatory":2,"minors":0,"coreRelations":4,"contextualRelations":0,"mixedRelations":0,"unknownRelations":0,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":0},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"2025-johannesburg-high-court-refers-applicant-lawyers-to-legal-practice-council-over-ai-tool-fictitious-citations","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'two cases cited in Northbound Processing'; 'were fictitious'; 'the revised version contained two additional incorrect citations'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'heads of argument contained fictitious case citations that appeared to have been generated by artificial intelligence'; 'contained two additional incorrect citations'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"While preparing judgment in Northbound Processing's urgent application against the South African Diamond and Precious Metals Regulator, the acting judge found that two cases cited in the applicant's heads of argument did not exist, and a corrected version supplied by junior counsel contained two further incorrect citations.","causal_attribution":"The judgment as described by ITWeb and by a law-firm alert; both rest on the same judgment, which was not read."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'acknowledged that the non-existent citations likely originated from an AI tool'; 'he had used a tool called'; 'which claimed to be trained solely on South African legal sources'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'counsel acknowledged the use of AI, accepted full responsibility'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"On the court's direct inquiry, junior counsel acknowledged that the non-existent citations likely originated from an AI tool and said a tool called Legal Genius had been used under deadline pressure.","causal_attribution":"Counsel's statement to the court as relayed by ITWeb; the law-firm alert relays the acknowledgment without naming the tool."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'found no intent to deceive the court'; 'be referred to the Legal Practice Council for investigation'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'a referral to the Legal Practice Council for investigation'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The judge accepted the legal team's apologies and found no intent to deceive the court, but ordered that the conduct of Northbound's legal practitioners be referred to the Legal Practice Council for investigation.","causal_attribution":"The court's order as described by both accounts of the judgment."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'While Northbound ultimately succeeded in obtaining the relief sought'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Northbound nevertheless obtained the relief it sought in the application.","causal_attribution":"The law-firm alert's account of the judgment."}],"effects":[{"label":"the applicant's legal practitioners were referred to the Legal Practice Council for investigation over fictitious citations","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.itweb.co.za/article/lawyers-face-probe-for-using-hallucinating-genai-in-court/Pero3MZ3221qQb6m","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in full in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-14 (HTTP 200). ITWeb reports from court documents it saw; the judgment itself was not available to the agent.","independence_group":"northbound-processing-judgment-zagpjhc"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.cliffedekkerhofmeyr.com/en/news/publications/2025/Practice/Employment-Law/combined-employment-and-knowledge-management-alert-4-july-Another-episode-of-fabricated-citations-real-repercussions-South-African-courts-show-no-tolerance-for-AI-hallucinated-cases","kind":"other","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in full in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-14 from a 2025 Internet Archive capture (the live page returned HTTP 403). A law-firm client alert analysing the same judgment; same origin as ITWeb.","independence_group":"northbound-processing-judgment-zagpjhc"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use"],"contexts":["justice","work"],"unknowns":["The exact date of the judgment and of the referral order.","How many practitioners were referred and the outcome of any Legal Practice Council investigation.","Which citations Legal Genius produced and whether the tool provider responded."],"geography":{"basis":"The heads were filed in, and the referral ordered by, the Gauteng Division of the High Court, Johannesburg (ITWeb, Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr). Where counsel prepared the heads is not stated, so no event or affected-person country is recorded from the court seat.","court_countries":["ZA"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published because two accounts of the judgment report that the court referred the applicant's lawyers to the Legal Practice Council after heads of argument cited non-existent cases, and that junior counsel told the court the citations likely came from the AI tool Legal Genius.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-14"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"ITWeb, which saw the court documents, reports that on the court's direct inquiry junior counsel acknowledged that the non-existent citations in the heads of argument likely originated from an AI tool and said a tool called Legal Genius had been used under deadline pressure; Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr's analysis of the judgment says counsel acknowledged the use of AI. The tool's output (citations of cases that do not exist) was filed in the heads, and the court referred the practitioners to the Legal Practice Council because fictitious authorities were placed before it. The attribution rests on counsel's acknowledgment as relayed by these two accounts of the judgment; the judgment itself was not read.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with"]},"name":"Johannesburg High Court refers a company's lawyers to the Legal Practice Council over fictitious citations that junior counsel said likely came from an AI tool","summary":"In an urgent application by Northbound Processing against the South African Diamond and Precious Metals Regulator, Acting Judge DJ Smit of the Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg, found while preparing judgment that two cases cited in the applicant's heads of argument did not exist. According to ITWeb, which saw the court documents, junior counsel first said a wrong version had been filed, a corrected version was found to contain two further incorrect citations, and on the court's direct inquiry junior counsel acknowledged that the citations likely originated from an AI tool called Legal Genius, used under deadline pressure. The judge accepted the legal team's apologies and found no intent to deceive, but referred the conduct of the applicant's legal practitioners to the Legal Practice Council for investigation (June 2025). The applicant obtained the relief it sought.","incidentDate":"2025-06-01","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2025-07-02","aiSystem":"Legal Genius, an AI legal research tool that junior counsel told the court had been used and which, junior counsel said, claimed to be trained solely on South African legal sources","aiProduct":"Legal Genius (reported)","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["professional_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"According to ITWeb and a law-firm alert on the judgment, the court referred the applicant's legal practitioners to the Legal Practice Council for investigation after heads of argument cited non-existent cases that junior counsel said likely came from the AI tool Legal Genius.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":0,"affectedCountStatus":"partial","affectedCountEvidence":"One person counted: the junior counsel who told the court the tool had been used, among the legal practitioners whose conduct was referred. The order refers the practitioners as a group and the sources read do not state how many were referred, so others are unquantified. The applicant company is not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"ZA","platformType":"assistant","outcomeType":"regulatory_action","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.itweb.co.za/article/lawyers-face-probe-for-using-hallucinating-genai-in-court/Pero3MZ3221qQb6m","primarySourceLabel":"ITWeb, 2 July 2025: Lawyers face probe for using hallucinating GenAI in court","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-14T03:03:33.803607+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-14T03:03:33.803607+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["south-africa","johannesburg","high-court","fictitious-citations","legal-practice-council","legal-research-tool"]},{"id":"2025-colorado-federal-court-fines-mypillow-defence-lawyers-over-brief-with-fabricated-citations-after-ai-admission","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Defendants filed their Brief in Opposition to Plaintiff'; 'the Court identified nearly thirty defective citations in the Opposition'; 'and most egregiously, citation of cases that do not exist'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'and most egregiously, citation of cases that do not exist'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The defendants' opposition to the plaintiff's motion in limine, filed on 25 February 2025 and signed by Kachouroff and DeMaster, contained nearly thirty defective citations, including misquotes and citations of cases that do not exist.","causal_attribution":"Established by the court orders, which record the court's own review of the filed brief."},{"id":"c2","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Was this motion generated by generative'; 'Initially, I did an outline for myself, and I'; 'drafted a motion, and then we ran it through AI'; 'I personally did not check it'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Final Pretrial/Trial Preparation Conference held on April 21, 2025'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"At the final pretrial conference on 21 April 2025, asked whether the motion was generated by generative artificial intelligence, Kachouroff said he had drafted it and then ran it through AI, and that he personally did not check the citations.","causal_attribution":"Counsel's statement to the court, quoted from the transcript in the 7 July order; it establishes what counsel said, and the AI's role in the defective citations rests on that statement and the co-counsel declaration."},{"id":"c3","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'believed some of these citations were likely from AI drafts'; 'I do not rely on AI to do legal research or find cases'; 'the use of generative artificial intelligence or gross carelessness by counsel'; 'Nor is this Court persuaded by counsel'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Co-counsel's declaration said Kachouroff had told her he believed some of the citations were likely from AI drafts; counsel also said a wrong draft had been filed by mistake and Kachouroff declared he does not rely on AI to do legal research or find cases. The court was not persuaded by the wrong-draft explanation and found no explanation of how the citations appeared absent generative AI or gross carelessness.","causal_attribution":"The declarations' content and the court's findings are documented by the order; the order does not itself find which tool produced the citations."},{"id":"c4","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'The Court hereby SANCTIONS Christopher I. Kachouroff and the law firm'; 'The Court hereby SANCTIONS Jennifer T. DeMaster in the amount of'; 'this Court does not extend the sanctions to Defendants'; 'no later than August 4, 2025'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'A federal judge ordered two attorneys representing MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell in a Colorado defamation case to pay $3,000 each'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"On 7 July 2025 the court held that Kachouroff and DeMaster violated Rule 11 and sanctioned Kachouroff and his law firm jointly $3,000 and DeMaster $3,000, payable by 4 August 2025, and did not extend the sanctions to Lindell or his companies.","causal_attribution":"Established by the operative part of the 7 July order; NPR relays it."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Kachouroff and DeMaster didn'; 'request for comment'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"NPR reported that Kachouroff and DeMaster did not respond to its request for comment.","causal_attribution":"NPR's own report of its request."}],"effects":[{"label":"two defence lawyers were fined $3,000 each for a brief with fabricated citations that lead counsel said had been run through AI","claim_id":"c4","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-cod-1_22-cv-01129/pdf/USCOURTS-cod-1_22-cv-01129-10.pdf","kind":"court_record","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in full in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-14 (HTTP 200). Order of 7 July 2025 (Doc. 383, 20 pages) read in full; the hearing transcript, the declarations and the draft exhibits it cites were not read separately.","independence_group":"coomer-v-lindell-d-colo-sanctions-orders"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-cod-1_22-cv-01129/pdf/USCOURTS-cod-1_22-cv-01129-8.pdf","kind":"court_record","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in full in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-14 (HTTP 200). Order to show cause of 23 April 2025 (Doc. 309) read in full.","independence_group":"coomer-v-lindell-d-colo-sanctions-orders"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.npr.org/2025/07/10/nx-s1-5463512/ai-courts-lawyers-mypillow-fines","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in full in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-14 (HTTP 200). NPR reports the 7 July order and quotes it; it adds that the lawyers did not respond to a request for comment.","independence_group":"coomer-v-lindell-d-colo-sanctions-orders"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use","others_use"],"contexts":["justice","work"],"unknowns":["Which AI tool was used on the brief and which citations it introduced.","Whether either lawyer has faced bar disciplinary proceedings over the brief; the final order imposes fines only."],"geography":{"basis":"The brief was filed in, and the sanctions imposed by, the US District Court for the District of Colorado (both orders). Where the lawyers drafted the brief is not stated, so no event or affected-person country is recorded from the court seat.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published because the court's 7 July 2025 order documents that two defence lawyers were fined $3,000 each for a brief with nearly thirty defective citations, including non-existent cases, and quotes lead counsel's statement in court that the draft was run through AI and not checked.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-14"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The court's 7 July 2025 order quotes lead counsel's answer at the 21 April 2025 conference that after drafting the motion 'we ran it through AI' and that he did not check the citations, and quotes co-counsel's declaration that he believed some of the citations were likely from AI drafts. The filed brief contained citations of cases that do not exist, and the court found counsel gave no explanation of how those citations appeared absent the use of generative artificial intelligence or gross carelessness; it fined both lawyers for the brief. The AI output is thus connected to the sanctioned filing by counsel's own statements in the court record. Counsel later declared that he does not rely on AI to do legal research or find cases, and the court did not identify the tool.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with"]},"name":"Colorado federal court fines two MyPillow defence lawyers $3,000 each over a brief with fabricated citations; lead counsel had admitted running it through AI","summary":"In the defamation case Coomer v. Lindell in the US District Court for the District of Colorado, a brief that lawyers for Mike Lindell and MyPillow filed on 25 February 2025 contained nearly thirty defective citations, including citations of cases that do not exist. At a conference on 21 April 2025 lead counsel Christopher Kachouroff told Judge Nina Y. Wang that he had drafted the motion and then 'ran it through AI' and had not personally checked the citations. Counsel later said a wrong draft had been filed by mistake; the court was not persuaded. On 7 July 2025 the court found that he and co-counsel Jennifer DeMaster had violated Rule 11 and fined each $3,000 (Kachouroff jointly with his law firm). The court did not sanction Lindell or his companies.","incidentDate":"2025-02-25","incidentEndDate":"2025-07-07","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2025-04-23","aiSystem":"A generative AI tool that lead counsel said the draft brief was run through; the court record does not identify which tool was used for this brief","aiProduct":"Unidentified AI drafting tool","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["professional_harm","financial_loss","legal_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"According to the court's 7 July 2025 order, two defence lawyers were found to have violated Rule 11 and were each fined $3,000 after filing a brief with nearly thirty defective citations, including non-existent cases, which lead counsel had said was run through AI.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"Two people sanctioned in the 7 July 2025 order: lead counsel, who told the court the draft was run through AI (counted as the AI user), and co-counsel who signed the brief, whose own use of AI is not established (counted as another person harmed). The law firm is an organisation and is not counted; the defendants were not sanctioned.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US","platformType":"assistant","outcomeType":"regulatory_action","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-cod-1_22-cv-01129/pdf/USCOURTS-cod-1_22-cv-01129-10.pdf","primarySourceLabel":"US District Court for the District of Colorado, Coomer v. Lindell, order on the order to show cause (Doc. 383), 7 July 2025","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-14T03:03:29.9489+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-14T03:03:29.9489+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["colorado","federal-court","defamation-case","lawyers","fabricated-citations","rule-11-sanction","generative-ai"]},{"id":"2025-jakarta-jusuf-hamka-ai-deepfake-detainee-videos-tiktok-trial","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'narasi fitnah yang dibuat dengan menggunakan Artificial Inteligen (AI) di media sosial TikTok'; 'sedang menggunakan pakaian tahanan dan dikaitkan dengan tuduhan korupsi, suap, dan gratifikasi'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'pelaku memakai teknologi Artificial Intelligence (AI) untuk melakukan manipulasi visual wajah Jusuf Hamka dan putrinya'; 'menyebarkannya melalui akun TikTok'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Menyebarkan narasi suap konsesi Tol Cawang-Pluit senilai lebih dari Rp1 triliun'; 'Memasang poster rekayasa yang mencalonkan Jusuf Hamka sebagai presiden 2029'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"},{"locator":"'seolah memakai baju tahanan kejaksaan karena dituduh melakukan suap, gratifikasi untuk konsesi tol Cawang-Pluit'; 'pelaku mengedit foto'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s9"}],"assertion":"Videos on TikTok showed Jusuf Hamka and his daughter as if wearing detainee uniforms, tied to narratives of corruption, bribery and gratification that his lawyers call false over the Cawang-Pluit toll concession; his lawyers say the faces were composited with AI into staged scenes (VIVA) and that photos were edited to show them in prosecutors' detainee clothing (ANTARA, 4 December 2025), and other content included a 'toll mafia' label and a fabricated 2029 presidential poster.","causal_attribution":"Hamka's lawyers and the prosecution case as reported; the videos were not inspected."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Laporan ini teregister di Polda Metro dengan nomor STTLP/B/7474/X/2025/SPKT/Polda Metro Jaya tertanggal 18 Oktober 2025'; 'Pada 24 November 2025, penyidik secara resmi meningkatkan status perkara ke tahap penyidikan usai ditemukan bukti'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'ditangkap penyidik Unit 2 Subdit 2 Direktorat Siber Polda Metro Jaya pada Kamis (27/11) usai dilaporkan pada 18 Oktober 2025'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'pada 27 November 2025, penyidik Unit 2 Subdit 2 Direktorat Siber Polda Metro Jaya menangkap salah seorang pemilik akun Tiktok'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"Hamka reported the content to Polda Metro Jaya on 18 October 2025; the case was raised to investigation on 24 November and the suspected maker and spreader was arrested by the cyber directorate on 27 November 2025.","causal_attribution":"Reported through Hamka's lawyers; VIVA's second page quotes the cyber directorate's deputy director confirming one arrest, without a date."},{"id":"c3","status":"corroborated","evidence":[{"locator":"'menghadiri sidang dakwaan dugaan hoaks dan manipulasi informasi elektronik konten deepfake di Pengadilan Negeri (PN) Jakarta Pusat pada Selasa (15/9/2026)'; 'kubu terdakwa melalui kuasa hukumnya mengaku bakal menempuh upaya eksepsi'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"'didakwa melanggar Pasal 35 juncto Pasal 51 ayat (1) UU ITE dengan ancaman hukuman maksimal 12 tahun penjara'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"The trial opened at the Central Jakarta District Court on 15 September 2026 with the reading of an indictment under Article 35 jo 51(1) of the ITE Law (maximum 12 years); the defence said it would file an exception.","causal_attribution":"Court reporting by tvOneNews and Poskota, with different content from the same hearing."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'narasi yang termuat dalam konten tersebut dinilainya tidak benar dan berpotensi merusak reputasinya'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"'penyebaran ini menimbulkan dampak psikologis, reputasional, serta kerugian moril'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Hamka said the content disturbed him, that its narratives were untrue and could damage his reputation, and that the campaign was systematic; his lawyer said the spread caused psychological, reputational and moral harm.","causal_attribution":"Hamka's own statements and his lawyer's; no independent assessment of harm."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'terdakwa mengaku mendapat imbalan sebesar Rp500.000 untuk setiap konten yang dibuat atas perintah pihak tertentu'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"},{"locator":"'kan dia dikasih duit Rp500.000 setiap konten'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"'pernyataan mengenai pembayaran tersebut merupakan klaim Jusuf yang masih menjadi bagian dari perkara'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s6"}],"assertion":"Hamka and his lawyers say the defendant admitted during the police investigation that he made the content on others' orders for Rp500,000 per item; tvOneNews notes this payment is Hamka's claim within a contested case.","causal_attribution":"Claim of the complainant's side; the alleged admission was not inspected."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Tidak ada ruang untuk restorative justice kecuali dia mau bicara dengan tegas di pengadilan, siapa yang menyuruh melakukan tindak pidana ini dan juga yang membayar'; 'surat dakwaan jaksa dinilai tidak cermat dan belum menjelaskan secara jelas perbuatan pidana yang didakwakan kepada kliennya'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s6"},{"locator":"'majelis hakim sempat menanyakan kemungkinan penyelesaian perkara melalui mekanisme restorative justice'; 'membantah argumentasi yang disampaikan pihak Jusuf Hamka'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s8"},{"locator":"'secara tegas menutup pintu penyelesaian secara restorative justice (RJ)'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s7"}],"assertion":"At the 29 September 2026 hearing the judges asked about restorative justice; Hamka's lawyer said there was no room for it unless the defendant named who ordered and paid; the defendant's lawyer said the content related to his anti-corruption committee role and that the indictment was unclear.","causal_attribution":"Three outlets' reports of the same hearing; tvOneNews and TVRI follow one shared text."},{"id":"c7","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'dinyatakan lengkap atau P21'; 'penyidik menyerahkan tersangka beserta barang bukti kepada penuntut umum pada Kejaksaan Negeri Jakarta Pusat'; 'Pasal 433 Ayat 2 Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2023 tentang KUHP juncto Pasal 441 Ayat 1'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"Hamka's lawyer said the case file had been declared complete (P21) and the suspect and evidence handed to Central Jakarta prosecutors, under alternative counts including Article 32(1) jo 48(1) ITE and Articles 433(2) jo 441(1) of the 2023 Criminal Code (reported 12 August 2026).","causal_attribution":"The lawyer's statement via Akurat; the P21 date is not given."}],"effects":[{"label":"AI-manipulated videos depicting him and his daughter as detainees with corruption allegations he denies spread on TikTok","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.antaranews.com/berita/5285803/kuasa-hukum-sebut-konten-hoaks-jusuf-hamka-diduga-dibuat-terorganisir","kind":"wire_report","access":"read","language":"id","translation_note":"Read live in Indonesian on 2026-09-30 (ANTARA, 3 December 2025): the lawyers' statement, the arrest date and the police report number. Researcher translation.","independence_group":"hamka-legal-team-statements"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.viva.co.id/berita/nasional/1865501-geger-jusuf-hamka-difitnah-pakai-baju-tahanan-pelaku-deepfake-diciduk-polisi","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"id","translation_note":"Read live in Indonesian on 2026-09-30 (VIVA, 3 December 2025, pages 1 and 2; page 2 saved by the verifier as bodies/verify-v3-viva-p2.txt): lawyer Mohammad Anwar on the AI manipulation, the report, the investigation stage and the arrest; page 2 carries Anwar's full statement and quotes the Polda Metro Jaya cyber directorate's deputy director confirming one arrest. Researcher translation.","independence_group":"hamka-legal-team-statements"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.akurat.co/hukum/881600/kasus-deepfake-jusuf-hamka-dinyatakan-lengkap-tersangka-dan-barang-bukti-dilimpahkan-ke-jaksa","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"id","translation_note":"Read live in Indonesian on 2026-09-30 (Akurat.co, 12 August 2026): P21, handover to Central Jakarta prosecutors and the counts, per lawyer Sogi Bagaskara. Researcher translation.","independence_group":"hamka-legal-team-statements"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://www.tvonenews.com/berita/467280-sidang-dakwaan-konten-hoaks-jusuf-hamka-buka-peluang-jalur-damai","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"id","translation_note":"Read live in Indonesian on 2026-09-30 (tvOneNews, 15 September 2026): indictment hearing, Hamka's remarks to reporters. Researcher translation.","independence_group":"tvonenews-court-reporting"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://www.poskota.co.id/2026/09/15/jusuf-hamka-hadiri-sidang-kasus-deepfake-ai-desak-polisi-bongkar-aktor-intelektual","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"id","translation_note":"Read live in Indonesian on 2026-09-30 (Poskota, 15 September 2026): the counts, the listed content and the lawyer's account of the police admission. Researcher translation.","independence_group":"poskota-court-reporting"},{"id":"s6","url":"https://www.tvonenews.com/berita/470241-sidang-lanjutan-konten-hoaks-kubu-jusuf-hamka-tolak-permintaan-restorative-justice","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"id","translation_note":"Read live in Indonesian on 2026-09-30 (tvOneNews, 29 September 2026): the restorative-justice question, both sides' lawyers. Researcher translation.","independence_group":"hearing-2026-09-29-shared-text"},{"id":"s7","url":"https://www.poskota.co.id/2026/09/29/tolak-restorative-justice-jusuf-hamka-desak-pembuat-deepfake-buka-identitas-aktor-intelektual","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"id","translation_note":"Read live in Indonesian on 2026-09-30 (Poskota, 29 September 2026): refusal of restorative justice. Researcher translation.","independence_group":"poskota-court-reporting"},{"id":"s8","url":"https://hukum.tvrinews.com/berita/tk6hpbu-tolak-restorative-justice-jusuf-hamka-minta-terdakwa-ungkap-pihak-yang-membiayai-konten","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"id","translation_note":"Read live in Indonesian on 2026-09-30 (TVRI News, 29 September 2026): the hearing and the next stage. Researcher translation.","independence_group":"hearing-2026-09-29-shared-text"},{"id":"s9","url":"https://www.antaranews.com/berita/5286403/kuasa-hukum-harap-polisi-ungkap-otak-penyebar-hoaks-jusuf-hamka","kind":"wire_report","access":"read","language":"id","translation_note":"Read live in Indonesian on 2026-09-30 (ANTARA, 4 December 2025): lawyers Anwar and Sogi on the edited photos, the Cawang-Pluit concession narrative and the suspected orderers (initials omitted). Researcher translation.","independence_group":"hamka-legal-team-statements"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["privacy","justice","work"],"unknowns":["When the videos were first posted and how far they spread.","Which tool made them.","Whether anyone besides the defendant has been identified as ordering or paying for the content.","The verdict."],"geography":{"basis":"The report, investigation and arrest were by Polda Metro Jaya (Jakarta) and the trial is at the Central Jakarta District Court (ANTARA; VIVA; tvOneNews); Hamka is an Indonesian businessman appearing at that court. Where the videos were made is not stated beyond the Jakarta police jurisdiction.","court_countries":["ID"],"event_countries":["ID"],"affected_person_countries":["ID"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-09-15 charter as a core case (AI-manipulated videos depicting a named public figure and his daughter as detainees with corruption allegations he denies, now the subject of a criminal trial). The AI description rests on the complainant's lawyers and the prosecution case as reported; court events are reported by several outlets. Hamka and his daughter are public figures; the defendant is not named here.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-30"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Hamka's lawyers say the maker used AI to manipulate his and his daughter's faces into staged scenes showing them in detainee uniforms (VIVA; ANTARA), and the prosecution's case as reported at trial describes AI-engineered videos and false narratives made in bulk (Poskota). The videos were not inspected and no tool is named; the defence disputes the case but is not reported to dispute that the content was AI-made.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["depicted_or_impersonated"]},"name":"Jakarta: AI-manipulated TikTok videos showed toll-road businessman Jusuf Hamka and his daughter in detainee uniforms with bribery and corruption narratives that Hamka denies; a TikTok account holder was arrested in November 2025 and is on trial at the Central Jakarta District Court, where Hamka's side refused restorative justice on 29 September 2026","summary":"Indonesian businessman Mohamad Jusuf Hamka reported to Jakarta police on 18 October 2025 that videos circulating on TikTok showed him and his daughter as if wearing prosecutors' detainee uniforms, tied to narratives of corruption, bribery and gratification over the Cawang-Pluit toll concession, which he denies and his lawyers call false; his lawyers say the faces were composited into staged scenes with AI, and that other content called him a 'toll mafia' and posted a fabricated poster of him running for president in 2029. Polda Metro Jaya's cyber directorate arrested the holder of the TikTok accounts on 27 November 2025; Hamka and his lawyers say the defendant admitted to police that he made the content on others' instructions for Rp500,000 per item; tvOneNews and TVRI note this is Hamka's side's claim within the contested case, and Poskota reports it is being examined at trial. The case file was reported complete (P21) on 12 August 2026 and the trial opened at the Central Jakarta District Court on 15 September 2026 under the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (Article 35 jo 51(1), maximum 12 years) and alternative counts. Hamka told reporters the content disturbed him and could damage his reputation and that the campaign was systematic. At the 29 September 2026 hearing the judges asked about restorative justice; Hamka's lawyer said there was no room for it unless the defendant named who ordered and paid for the content. The defendant's lawyer said the content related to his work as secretary-general of an anti-corruption committee and that the indictment was unclear.","incidentDate":"2025-01-01","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"year","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2025-12-03","aiSystem":"AI-manipulated ('deepfake') videos and edited photos compositing the faces of Jusuf Hamka and his daughter into scenes showing them in detainee uniforms, posted on TikTok (per his lawyers; tool not identified)","aiProduct":"Unidentified image and video tool","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["reputational_harm","psychological_distress"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Jusuf Hamka says AI-manipulated videos depicting him and his daughter as detainees with corruption allegations he denies spread on TikTok, disturbed him and threatened his reputation; his lawyers describe psychological, reputational and moral harm (tvOneNews; VIVA; ANTARA).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":2,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"Two depicted people: Jusuf Hamka and his daughter (ANTARA; VIVA; Poskota). Exact 2.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"ID","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"criminal_charges","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.antaranews.com/berita/5285803/kuasa-hukum-sebut-konten-hoaks-jusuf-hamka-diduga-dibuat-terorganisir","primarySourceLabel":"ANTARA News, 3 December 2025: Kuasa hukum sebut konten hoaks Jusuf Hamka diduga dibuat terorganisir","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-30T04:13:45.955729+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T04:13:45.955729+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["deepfakes","ai-generated-video","tiktok","defamation","disinformation","criminal-trial","uu-ite","indonesia","jakarta","depicted-or-impersonated"]},{"id":"2025-wadsworth-lawyers-sanctioned-ai-fabricated-citations","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"ECF 181, pages 3–5, Procedural Facts and How the Fake Cases Were Generated.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The order records a 22 January filing containing eight fictitious citations generated with MX2.law and not verified before filing.","causal_attribution":"The order records counsel’s admissions and the court’s findings."},{"id":"c2","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"ECF 181, pages 5–6, Remedial Steps; pages 12–17, individual sanctions and conclusion.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The court fined three lawyers a total of $5,000, removed the drafter from the case and treated withdrawal, candour, fee reimbursement and new safeguards as mitigation.","causal_attribution":"Sanctions address professional verification duties; the record does not assign sole responsibility to AI."}],"effects":[{"label":"Individual sanctions and removal from representation","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/gov.uscourts.wyd_.64014.181.0_1.pdf","kind":"court_order","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"wadsworth-ecf181"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use","others_use"],"contexts":["justice","work"],"unknowns":["Underlying model, precise drafting day and eventual payment of penalties are unknown."],"geography":{"basis":"Wyoming federal court. Drafting location and lawyers’ residence not established.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"A filed order establishes the sanctions and AI-assisted drafting, with mitigation retained.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-29"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Court order identifies the tool and records the drafter’s prompts.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with","acted_on_behalf"]},"name":"Three lawyers sanctioned after filing AI-generated fictitious citations","summary":"A Wyoming federal court fined three lawyers a total of $5,000 and removed the drafting lawyer from Wadsworth v. Walmart after a January 2025 filing cited eight nonexistent cases. The order identifies MX2.law as the drafting tool, records failure to verify its output and credits subsequent remedial steps.","incidentDate":"2025-01-22","incidentEndDate":"2025-02-24","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2025-02-24","aiSystem":"MX2.law","aiProduct":"MX2.law","aiCompany":"Morgan & Morgan","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"verified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["legal_harm","professional_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The court imposed $3,000, $1,000 and $1,000 penalties and revoked the drafting lawyer’s admission to this case.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":2,"affectedCountStatus":"documented_minimum","affectedCountEvidence":"Three individually sanctioned lawyers; one drafted with AI. Clients and institutional costs are not included in this minimum.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","platformType":"assistant","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/gov.uscourts.wyd_.64014.181.0_1.pdf","primarySourceLabel":"Wadsworth v. Walmart, ECF 181, sanctions order filed 24 February 2025","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-29T10:57:12.469277+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:20.611123+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["historical-2025"]}]}