Activities of Jiří POSPÍŠIL related to 2020/2016(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on artificial intelligence in criminal law and its use by the police and judicial authorities in criminal matters
Amendments (7)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the right to fair trial is a fundamental right which also applies to enforcement of the law and taking into account that AI-based technologies could also have an impact on different human rights;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and related technologies willcan bring significant benefits in the area of criminal law such as contributeing to the reducing of crime rates, the use of statistical data analytics in crime analysis and prevention, and the more effective and efficient detection and investigation of criminal cases, as well as operation of criminal justice systems;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises the importance of consideringtaking into account the ethical and operational implications of the use of AI and related technologies within criminal justice systems as well as liability and evidentiary issues in case of potential faults associated with operation of AI - systems;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines the importance of being able to access AI-produced or AI-assisted outputs for notification procedures and the role of AI and related technologies in criminal law enforcement and crime prevention; recalls the importance of questions related to governance, transparency and accountabilityStresses– on one hand - the importance of the role and the potential of AI and related technologies in criminal law enforcement and crime prevention, in particular regarding the analysis of large amounts of evidence in criminal investigations and the identification of suspected persons or victims of crime; on the other hand emphasises the risk of biased decisions based on the use of AI technologies and the need for thorough discussions to avoid such decisions;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Underlines the importance of human-in-command principle and verification of AI-produced or AI-assisted outputs; and recalls the importance of questions related to governance, transparency, explainability and accountability to ensure respect for fundamental rights and avoid potential faults in the AI;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the recommendations of the Commission’s High-Level Expert Group on AI for a proportionate, considerate and risk-based use of biometric recognition technology and suggests that the application of such technology must be clearly warranted under existing laws and urgesuggests the Commission to assess how to effectively incorporate these effectively;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers it necessary to clarifyanalyse whether law enforcement decisions canould possibly be delegated to AI and if yes, under which conditions and in which regards could Member States allow such use of AI; stresses the need to develop codes of conduct for the design and use of AI to help law enforcersment and judicial authorities in case law enforcement decisions would be delegated to AI; refers to the ongoing work in the Committee on Legal Affairs.