Did you know that in Canada if the tax authorities go after you in court their factual assumptions are presumed to be right, and you have to prove them wrong. Burden of proof is on the defendant. The legal system is fundamentally designed to favour the state in a ton of tiny (and not so tiny) ways. But that's ok. Lawyers the world over level the playing field (and often even tilt it towards their clients leading to public outrage) by looking at the exact rules of the game and playing it exceedingly well.

Look at Facebook v. Europe. That's a horse race that is. I think Facebook is going to lose, but simply by having lawyers very carefully going over all the rules, Facebook has managed to do its thing in Europe for a decade now despite everyone hating its guts.

The whole idea of the "rule of law" isn't that the rules are fair, it's that they are known and will be binding on all players. Western governments find even that much power to the people to be hugely annoying.

If China were to transition to an AI powered justice (and I don't think they mean real decision making here, but rather just filling out paperwork and supporting documents) it would be a huge advancement for human rights as it would require them to embrace the rule of law.