Generative artificial intelligence in nicaraguan legal practice limits risks and professional responsibility

Abstract

Generative artificial intelligence facilitates the preparation of legal documents but raises concerns about reliability, confidentiality and professional oversight. This article aims to define its instrumental uses in Nicaraguan litigation, notarial practice and legal education, and to examine the duties that remain when its outputs are used. It presents a qualitative, documentary and legal doctrinal analysis of the legislation and scholarly sources identified in the manuscript, supplemented by professional accounts used for illustrative purposes. The analysis distinguishes drafting assistance from legal assessment, identifies general provisions on data protection, procedural conduct and reasoned decisions that can address certain risks, and compares these criteria with foreign regulatory and professional references. The accounts are neither judicial precedents nor evidence establishing a causal relationship between a tool and the reported defect. The article concludes that these technologies require verification of sources, facts and legal relevance without displacing professional obligations. It proposes guidelines for review and legal education. Its interpretive scope does not support estimates of national use or error rates, or findings of liability in undocumented cases