'Bigger questions' after parole board's AI use blunder

A peak prisoner advocacy body will comb over dozens of parole decisions for artificial intelligence influence after a "deeply troubling" error in a high-profile murderer's case.

The Supreme Court of Tasmania on Tuesday ruled a parole condition preventing Susan Neill-Fraser from speaking to the media was invalid.

Neill-Fraser was released on parole in 2022 after serving 13 years behind bars for murdering her partner Bob Chappell on their yacht in 2009.

The state parole board later added conditions preventing her from speaking to the media to claim her innocence or an alleged wrongful conviction.

It was revealed in court that the parole board relied on a document that had been prepared with the help of AI and referred to case law that didn't exist.

Prisoners Legal Service Tasmania chair Greg Barns said the condition was deeply troubling and it was extraordinary the case law wasn't checked.

The legal service would examine some 50-60 parole decisions over the past two years to see whether AI had been used, he said.

"I'm not saying it has been, but if it has we'll be bringing this to the attention of the government," he said.

Attorney-General Guy Barnett has written to the parole board asking for an explanation about its professional standards and an assurance such a problem doesn't occur again.

Mr Barnett has also asked for the justice department to remind staff about its AI use policy.

The justice department has been contacted for comment about the parole board's use of AI and whether any audits or reviews are being undertaken.

The Neill-Fraser situation highlighted AI's dangers, family law specialist Will Stidston said.

"Unfortunately, it's a further example of the care that needs to be taken … by those in the legal space," said Mr Stidston, who has written about the evolving use of AI.

Guidelines in place nationally for legal professionals' use of AI were sufficient, he said, but they were only as good as the individuals using the programs.