Activities of Markéta GREGOROVÁ related to 2020/2012(INL)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION with recommendations to the Commission on framework of ethical aspects of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies
Amendments (7)
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights that, based on a human- centric approach, the Union follows a path of responsibility, of protecting our citizens, and of defending our values, whilst seizing the opportunities that those technologies offer; welcomes and supports the Commission’s High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence ‘Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI’ published on 9 April 2019 and its position on lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS);
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines that the Union must be at the forefront of mastering those technologies by establishing well defined processes for their use, for understanding the related ethical aspects and for fostering an effective international regulatory framework that contains the inherent risks of these technologies and prevents use for malicious purposes; those include in particular unintended harm to persons, be it material or immaterial, such as breach of fundamental rights; urges the VP/HR, the Member States and the Council to initiate multilateral negotiations on a legally binding instrument regulating LAWS, with an effective enforcement mechanisms; regrets the failure to agree on such regulation at the Convention on Conventional Weapons;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that for any defence application of AI enabled systems, the Union should set technical and organisational standards to ensure their resilience against cyber-attacks and digital influence, as well as their compliance with the highest possible trustworthiness standards as regards the collection and exploitation of operational data; whereas any given LAWS could malfunction on account of badly written code or a cyber- attack perpetrated by an enemy state or a non-state actor; calls on Member States to clearly define and communicate the expected economic, diplomatic and military consequences third actors engaging in cyber-attacks against European weapons with a high degree of autonomy will face; believes that the expected reaction must be credible and severe enough to prevent such actions cause by hostile states and other actors;
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stressed that all AI-systems in defence must have a concrete and well- defined domain of use and must be endowed with the ability to detect and disengage or diseactivate deployed systems should they move from their domain of use or engage in any escalatory or unintended action; supports the statements of the world’s most prominent AI researchers in their Open Letter from 2015, which calls for a 'ban on offensive autonomous weapons beyond meaningful human control';
Amendment 89 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines that the entire responsibility for the decision to design, develop, deploy and use AI-systems must rest on human operators and the human-in- the-loop principle must also be applied to the command and control of AI-enabled systems; stresses that AI-enabled systems must allow the military leadership to assume its full responsibility and exercise the necessary level of judgment for taking lethal or large-scale destructive action be means of such systems; reminds and supports in this respect its resolution on autonomous weapons systems of 12 September 2019;
Amendment 97 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Welcomes the agreement of Council and Parliament to exclude lethal autonomous weapons ‘without the possibility for meaningful human control over the selection and engagement decisions when carrying out strikes’ from actions funded under the European Defence Fund;
Amendment 118 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses the need to overcome the current fragmentation within the Union as regards national AI-related law, research, innovation and expertise in the area of AI, which puts in jeopardy the internal market and the objective to ensure trustworthy and secure development of AI in Europe; in this respect welcomes the inclusion of AI- related projects under the European Industrial Development Programme (EDIDP); believes that the future European Defence Fund (EDF) and the Permanent structured cooperation (PESCO) also offer well adapted frameworks for future AI- related projects that would help to better streamline Union efforts in this field, and promote at the same time the EU’s objective to strengthen human rights, international law, and multilateral solutions;