Women in LegalTech: Navigating AI Regulation in India - A Conversation with Paavni Jain | Event Recap

Admin ILTN
May 9
5 min read

We conducted a focused session under the Women in LegalTech vertical of the Indian LegalTech Network (ILTN), titled "Navigating AI Regulation in India." The conversation featured Paavni Jain, Assistant Director at the Cyril Shroff Centre for AI, Law and Regulation, and Assistant Professor at Jindal Global Law School (JGLS), and brought together a room of women exploring, building, and questioning the future of LegalTech in India.

The discussion moved quickly past surface-level optimism about AI. What emerged instead was a candid examination of what it actually means to navigate a field that is changing faster than the systems built to govern it — and what it means to do so as a woman, as a student, and as someone who has chosen to build rather than wait.

Here are the most important insights from that session, reframed for anyone building or exploring LegalTech in India.

1. The Struggle is Real and it is Structural

One of the earliest and most honest parts of the conversation was about gender.

The challenge women face in LegalTech is not unique to the field — it reflects a broader corporate culture that has historically underestimated women in male-majority spaces. Women are expected to corroborate more, justify more, and prove more before being extended the same credibility that others receive by default. A preconceived notion operates quietly but consistently: a woman's standing is judged before her work is even examined.

There is also a statistical nuance that rarely gets named directly. Women are questioned on what they say regardless of how obvious or well-reasoned the point is. The representation gap in LegalTech is visible — and it carries downstream effects on how women participate, speak, and are heard in the spaces that shape the field.

On workplace culture, the point was made clearly: a healthier corporate ecosystem must give women genuine space — to speak, to question, without hesitation. Internal jokes about women are not harmless. They are jokes about her profession, her competence, and her right to be in the room.

The more important shift, she suggested, is internal: seeing yourself first as a builder — not just as a woman navigating a room that wasn't built for you.

2. This Generation is Different and That is Both a Strength and a Risk

A significant thread in the conversation was the generational shift in how students approach LegalTech.

The current generation engages with the field without waiting for incentives. They are not deferring the application of what they learn - they want to implement, experiment, and contribute now. Unlike previous generations that treated knowledge as something to accumulate before acting, this generation treats action as part of the learning itself.

She believes in fostering student environments through deployment and direct exposure. But she was careful to name the other side of this too. The impatience of this generation is agathokakological — it carries both promise and risk. The urgency drives innovation. The absence of patience can undermine depth.

Her advice was pointed: verification over endless research. Act, test, confirm — rather than theorise indefinitely. And through all of it, prioritise the development of cognitive and analytical skills. Those are what carry you when the tools change.

Don't wait until you know enough. You learn by doing — but do it with intention.

3. What LegalTech Actually Demands From You

The conversation reframed what competence looks like in LegalTech today.

Information is no longer scarce, it is overwhelming. The real skill is not knowing everything. It is knowing how to filter what actually matters. In a world where anyone can access the same data, the differentiator is judgment.

Beyond that, the field demands a specific set of competencies that legal education does not always build: critical thinking, public speaking, active listening, professional conduct, and networking. These are not peripheral qualities. They are core requirements for anyone who wants to work meaningfully at the intersection of law and technology.

You don't need to know everything. You need to know what to do with what you find.

4. On Frameworks - How India Should Think About Governing & Regulating AI?

One of the more substantive parts of the conversation concerned regulation and how India approaches the governance of technology.

India currently operates on a specific, siloed Act-based regulatory system rather than a horizontal or unified framework. This creates gaps — particularly when technology moves faster than legislation, which it almost always does. Her position was clear: regulation is necessary, but it is not a prerequisite for technology to function in law. You do not always need legislation to govern technology. Other mechanisms exist and should be used.

She pointed to the Singapore model and Brazil's approach as comparative frameworks worth examining — not to replicate, but to learn from.

Her more structural proposal was this: just as a Constitution is built on layered, foundational principles, AI frameworks should be built on a multilayer approach — constructed from the ground up, with clarity at every level. The two non-negotiable pillars of any AI governance framework, she argued, are accountability and responsibility.

And finally, a distinction that mattered: AI literacy is not the same as AI adaptation.

The goal is not to understand AI in theory. It is to function effectively in a world where AI is already at work.

5. What She Would Tell Every Woman and Every Student in This Space

The session closed with advice that was direct and without qualification.

For women in LegalTech: build your environment around AI rather than resist it. Do not underestimate what your representation means. Do not be afraid to take that step, or to ask the question that feels uncomfortable. Experiment. Make mistakes. Do not let anyone silence you or reduce you to a label. There is no version of success that requires you to change who you are.

For students who want to enter LegalTech: stay curious and hungry to learn — that drive matters more than credentials or institutional pedigree. Explore different courses and adjacent fields. Use basic situational awareness to understand how LegalTech markets actually function. And start before you feel ready.

Opportunities in LegalTech are rarely handed over. They are built — by people willing to begin.

Final Thoughts

What this conversation made clear is that navigating AI regulaion in LegalTech is not simply a technical challenge. It is a human one. It requires women to push through spaces not designed for them. It requires students to act before they have all the answers. It requires builders to think in systems, govern with intention, and lead without waiting for permission.

For those entering this space, the takeaway is not a framework or a skill list. It is an orientation.

Be curious. Be present. Build anyway.