8 Amendments of Paul TANG related to 2020/2013(INI)
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
paragraph 1
paragraph 1
1. Sees the great pUnderlines that the use of Artifical Intelligence need to fully respect fundamental rights, freedoms and values, including privacy, the protenctial offered by the use and development of artificial intelligence as an opportunity for more rapid economic development in the EU; on of personal data, non-discrimination and the freedom of expression and information, as enshrined in the EU Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; Calls in that regard on the Commission to implement an obligation of transparency and explainability of AI applications, penalties to enforce such obligations, the necessity of human intervention, as well as other measures, such as independent audits and specific stress tests to assist and enforce compliance; Such independent audits should be conducted annually, in analogy with the financial sector, to examine whether the used AI-applications and checks and balances are in accordance with specified criteria and are supervised by an independent sufficient overseeing authority;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
paragraph 2
paragraph 2
2. StresEmphasises that the use, creation and management of artificial intelligence must respect the fundamental rights, values and freedoms expressed in the EU Treaties and in the idea underpinning the crapid development of AI requires a strong futureproof legislative framework to protect personal data and privacy; Stresses therefore in this regard that all AI applications need to fully respect Union data protection law, namely Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council (GDPR)1a and Direactionve (EC) 2002/58 of the European Union; welcomes the publication of the Commission's White Paper on Artificial Intelligence and encourages deeper research into the use of Artificial Intelligence by state authorities; stresses that the European Union must contribute to the creation of an international legal framework for the use of AI, especially in the context of building the strategic advantage that AI can offer; Parliament and of the Council (ePrivacy)1b currently under revision, freedom of expression and non- discrimination; 1aRegulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1); 1bDirective 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications) (OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37).
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
paragraph 2 a (new)
paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Recalls that AI may give rise to biases and thus to various forms of discrimination such as gender, race, color, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, agesexual orientation, gender expression and sex characteristics; in this regard, recalls that everyone’s rights must be ensured and that AI initiatives must not be discriminatory in any form;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
paragraph 3
paragraph 3
3. Notes that the use of artificial intelligence has great potential in the fight against crime, online terrorist content and cybercrime; considers that, in each of these cases, there must be certainty that its use does not lead to the unjustified deletion or blocking of contentin fighting crime and cyber crime brings a wide range of possibilities and opportunities, in order to let the principle what is illegal offline is illegal online prevail, while at the same time posing risks to the protection of civil liberties, as the freedom of expression and the non-discrimination principle; Underlines therefore the need for transparency and explainability of AI algorithms and thus to the censorship of or discrimination against views expressed online; man oversight and verification and for due process, including the right of appeal, especially for decisions taken within the framework of prerogatives of public power;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
paragraph 3 a (new)
paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Observes that AI is used to manipulate face- and audiovisual characteristics, often referred to as deepfakes; Notes that this technique can be used to promote terrorist and other illegal views and to disseminate disinformation; Asks the Commission therefore to impose an obligation for all deepfake material or any other realistically made synthetic videos, to state it's not original, a strict limitation when used for electoral purposes and strong enforcement;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion
paragraph 3 b (new)
paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Emphasises the importance of the protection of personal data and privacy; Observes the rapid development of AI applications to recognise unique characteristic elements, such as facial, movements and attitudes; Warns for interferences of privacy, non- discrimination and the protection of personal data with the use of automated recognition applications; Calls on the Commission to consider an absolute ban on the use of facial recognition systems in the public space and in premises meant for education and (health) care and a moratorium on the deployment of facial recognition systems for law enforcement in semi-public spaces, such as airports, until the technical standards can be considered fully fundamental rights compliant, results derived are non- discriminatory, and there is public trust in the necessity and proportionality for the deployment of such technologies;
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion
paragraph 4
paragraph 4
4. Stresses that all operations undertaken by artificial intelligence must always remain under human supervision; and intervention; stresses that artificial intelligence in the justice system should be used to improve the analysis and collection of data and the protection of victims, but that it is no substitute for human beings in terms of sentencing or decision-making;
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion
paragraph 5
paragraph 5