Activities of Sabrina PIGNEDOLI related to 2020/2016(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Artificial intelligence in criminal law and its use by the police and judicial authorities in criminal matters (debate)
Amendments (13)
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
- having regard to the 'European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Systems and their environment', adopted by the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) of the Council of Europe on 3 December 20181 a, _________________ 1a https://rm.coe.int/ethical-charter-en- for-publication-4-december- 2018/16808f699c
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the right to fair trial is aone of the fundamental rights which also appliesy to enforcement of the law;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and related technologies will contribute to the reducing of crime rates, the use ofmay be used to analyse statistical data analytics in crime analysis and prevention, and thecontribute to the proper operation of criminal justice systems;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas, owing to the intrinsically opaque nature of AI-systems, the new tools used in criminal justice contexts might conflict with some fundamental freedoms;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas possible risks linked to the application of AI-systems in criminal justice matters need to be prevented and mitigated in order to safeguard the fundamental rights of suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Systems and their environment, adopted by the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) of the Council of Europe, lays down some fundamental guidelines to which public and private entities responsible for the design and development of AI tools and services should adhere; whereas, in particular, the Ethical Charter consists of the following principles: 1) principle of respect for fundamental rights; 2) principle of non- discrimination; 3) principle of quality and security; 4) principle of transparency, impartiality and fairness; 5) principle 'under user control';
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines the importance of beingincreasing the transparency of AI-systems that are used in criminal justice matters in order to enable judicial oversight and to be able to access AI-produced or AI- assisted outputs for notification procedures and theand, ultimately, to define the responsibility and role of AI and related technologies in criminal law enforcement and crime prevention; recalls the importance of questions related to governance, transparency and accountability;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers it vital that the application of AI-systems in the context of criminal proceedings should ensure respect for the fundamental principles of criminal proceedings, including the right to a fair trial, the preservation of the principle of the presumption of innocence and the right to an effective remedy, as well as ensuring monitoring and independent control of automated decision-making systems;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the use of AI applications in use by law enforcement includconnection with law enforcement is already a reality and is expected to grow and intensify, at various levels, over the coming years; whereas law enforcement authorities in various Member States already make extensive use of those technologies; whereas these applications such asinclude facial recognition technologies,and biometric identification software, analysis software and videos and images, including automated number plate recognition, speakerech identification, speech identification technologies, lip- reading technologies, aural surveillance (i.e. gunshot detection algorithms), autonomous research and analysis of identified databases, forecasting (predictive policing and crime hotspot analytics), behaviour detection tools, autonomous tools to identify financial fraud and terrorist financing, social media monitoring (scraping and data harvesting for mining connections), international mobile subscriber identity (IMSI) catchers, and automated surveillance systems incorporating different detection capabilities (such as heartbeat detection and thermal cameras); whereas the aforementioned applications have vastly varying degrees of reliability and accuracy;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reaffirms that all AI solutions for law enforcement and the judiciary also need to fully respect the principles of non- discrimination, freedom of movement, the presumption of innocence and right of defence, freedom of expression and information, freedom of assembly and of association, equality before the law, and the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial, in addition to addressing any ethical and professional conduct-related issues stemming from a possible disengagement of judicial bodies;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reaffirms that all AI solutions for law enforcement and the judiciary also need to fully respect the principles of non- discrimination, freedom of movement, the presumption of innocence and right of defence, freedom of expression and information, freedom of assembly and of association, equality before the law, and the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial, in addition to taking into account the principle of the rehabilitative role of the penalty;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the potential for bias and discrimination arising from the use of machine learning and AI applications; notes that biases can be inherent in underlying datasets, especially when historical data is being used, introduced by the developers of the algorithms, or generated when the systems are implemented in real world settings; points out that the result provided by AI applications is necessarily influenced by the quality of the data used by the applications themselves, and calls for the introduction of mechanisms to ensure the quality of the data, the independence of their source, the independence of the authority collecting them and the accessibility of all data used by AI applications;
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Underlines that in judicial and law enforcement contexts, the final decision always needs to be taken by a human, who can be held accountable for the decisions made, and include the possibility of a recourse for a remedy; refers, in this regard, to Article 22 of the General Data Protection Regulation which stipulates that a person has the right not to be subject to a decision which produces legal effects concerning him or her or significantly affects him or her and is based solely on automated data processing designed to evaluate certain aspects of that person's personality;