Let's just define that "human like" in context of machine translation from now on mean "with full legal responsibility". Then let's see who claim their translator is "human like".
If you defined it that way, not even human translators would meet the standard. Treaties and other official documents published in multiple languages always specify one as the "official" one for purposes of legal interpretation and that, in the event of conflict or confusion, the translations are subservient to it. Setting a bar for AI performance so high that even humans don't reach it seems unhelpful.
Actually most international treaties specify all language versions to be equally authentic. Multilingual contracts on the other hand generally have a single authoritative version.
