Imposter Syndrome Among Legal Professionals in an AI-Augmented Judiciary

The necessity to respond to imposter syndrome in this scenario is significant, as it crosses the fundamental ethical considerations, judicial independence, and sustainable development goals, specifically SDG 16 of access to justice and SDG 8 of decent work. The litigious system of law has long required an uncompromising belief-in-self; barristers in wigs before the Supreme Court or High Courts represent authority. By changing the roles of interpretive mastery to oversight via predictive sentencing algorithms and contract made bots installed on tribunals like the National Company Law Tribunal and family courts, AI augmentation disrupts this archetype. The outcome with the symptomatology perfectionism, overworks, and burns out shows the pervasive effect of the syndrome. The implication of sustainable legal ecosystems is conspicuous: SDG-associated judiciaries need robust maintenance sticks, but imposter syndrome is subtractive of this, as it encourages seclusion rather than cooperation, as evidenced by the unwillingness to co-author AI-aided opinions.