Why does a legal amendment not yet adopted a version control system like Git for example? Law basically a text with certain layout and amendment is the same as the change.
Bing Chat said:
That's an interesting question! While I couldn't find any specific information on why legal amendments have not adopted a version control system like Git, there could be several reasons for this. One reason could be that the legal system and its processes are often steeped in tradition and can be slow to change. Additionally, the legal system is complex and involves many different parties, so implementing a new system like Git could be challenging. Another reason could be that the legal system has its own established methods for tracking changes to laws and amendments, and there may not be a perceived need for a version control system like Git. However, this is just speculation on my part. Is there anything else you would like to know? 😊
Source: Conversation with Bing, 06/09/2023
(1) version control - Alternatives to Git? - Stack Overflow.
(2) Git vs GitHub – What is Version Control and How Does it Work?.
(3) Understanding Git-Based Version Control for Industrial Automation.
Meanwhile ChatGPT said:
The idea of using a version control system like Git for legal amendments is interesting and has been proposed in various contexts, but there are several challenges and considerations that have so far limited its widespread adoption in legal systems. Here are some reasons:
Complexity of Legal Language
Legal language is highly specialized and follows strict conventions. The diffing algorithms used in version control systems may not always capture the subtleties of these changes, and so specialized tools would likely be needed.
Change Approval Process
Legal changes often need to be approved through a specific process involving multiple parties, such as various branches of government in the case of legislation. This is a lot more involved than simply accepting a pull request.
Accessibility
The law needs to be accessible to everyone, not just those who are familiar with version control systems. This means that even if such a system were used internally, a more accessible interface would need to be provided for the public.
Accountability and Security
Legal documents often require a strict chain of custody and evidentiary support to be admissible in court. The systems used for legal documents must meet high standards for security and accountability that go beyond what version control systems typically provide.
Tradition and Resistance to Change
The legal field is often slow to adopt new technologies, in part because of the high stakes involved, and in part because of institutional resistance to change.
Interpretation over Text
Law is not just about what is explicitly stated in the text but also about interpretation, precedent, and intent, which are not things that can be easily captured in a text-based version control system.
Public Records
Laws and legal documents are often considered public records that need to be kept in specific ways to be legally admissible. It's not clear that a Git-like system could meet these requirements without significant modification.
Collaboration Vs. Authority
In open-source projects managed with Git, the emphasis is on collaboration and community contributions. Legal systems, on the other hand, are often explicitly hierarchical, with changes needing to be approved by a specific authority.
Despite these challenges, there are some initiatives that aim to bring version control to legal documents, but these are mostly in the early stages and have not yet seen widespread adoption.
Top comments (3)
Nobody and nothing (apart: lots of work) prevents you to put legal texts into whatever tool you want to help visualize the changes.
In fact legifrance.gouv.fr/ which records all legal texts in France
has a GitHub repo of the legal texts.
Now I don't want to disappoint you, but changing the law by submitting a PR is not something that is coming around the corner :)
Ce dépôt des Codes en vigueur permet à tout un chacun de consulter, modifier (_fork_) et proposer leurs changements (_Pull Request_) qui seront examinés systématiquement par les instances legislatives de la République Française. Ces dernières mettront en place dans les plus brefs délais un système de validation par les citoyens (_peers_) afin de pouvoir répondre à toutes les demandes. Nous travaillons de concert avec l'équipe de Github pour rendre disponible en Français l'interface de cette plateforme.
Les Codes en vigueur
Ce dépôt des Codes en vigueur de le République Française permet à tout un chacun de consulter, modifier (fork) et proposer leurs changements (Pull Request) qui seront examinés systématiquement par les instances législatives de la République Française. Ces dernières mettront en place dans les plus brefs délais un système de validation par les citoyens (peers) afin de pouvoir répondre à toutes les demandes. Nous travaillons de concert avec l'équipe de Github pour rendre l'interface de cette plateforme disponible en Français.
Le Projet
Dans le cadre de la 'Grande Participation Citoyenne', le gouvernement français, en partenariat avec Legifrance, inaugure ici l'entrée de la législation française dans un système de modification et de validation décentralisé.
Via la présente plateforme, il est offert à tous les citoyens français la possibilité de consulter, modifier et proposer leurs contributions à la…
However, I understand your point. If we can design laws to adapt to our current technology, such as GitHub in this case, it could make it easier for developers to understand and apply these laws for awareness. For instance, if there’s a law about transportation, developers might be able to use this law (with or without help the current LLM) in GitHub format to raise awareness in their country and turn the law language into more layman-friendly.
Another way to see it, is that git has invented nothing, the process of making and refactoring the law is itself a concurrent version system.
But it's a very heavy one where pull requests and CI is a huge and messy battle of nitpicking, trade offs, values, interests and conflicts.
For this reason, merging a PR even as simple as "women should be able to vote too" is a messy process that can take decades.