BETA

51 Amendments of Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO related to 2020/2013(INI)

Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 a (new)
- - having regard to the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, the Committee on Transport and Tourism and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs,
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas AI, robotics and related technologies are liable to have awith the potential to directly impact on all aspects of peoin societies, including basic social and economic principle's lives in societand values, are being developed very quickly;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
A a. Whereas a common framework within the Union must cover all situations,such as the development, deployment and use of AI, robotics and related technologies,in which the Union´s principles and values must be reflected.
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
A b. Whereas Parliament has repeatedly called for the elaboration and urgent adoption of a common position on lethal autonomous weapons systems, an international ban on the development, production and the use of autonomous lethal weapons systems capable of attack without significant human control, as well as the initiation of effective negotiations for their prohibition;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas the Union and its Member States have a particular responsibility to make sure that theseAI, robotics and related technologies, contribute to the well-being and general interest of their citizens;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
B a. Whereas some Member States have also begun to reflect on the possible development of legal standards or legislative changes to take account of new applications of these technologies;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
B b. Whereas European citizens could benefit from an appropriate, efficient, transparent and coherent regulatory approach at Union level that defines sufficiently clear conditions for companies to develop applications and plan their business models, while ensuring that the Union and its Member States retain control over the regulations to be established, so that they are not forced to adopt or accept standards set by others;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas this particular responsibility implies a need to examine questions of interpretation and application of international law in so far as the EU is affected in the areas of civil and military uses of suchAI, robotics and related technologies and questions of state authority vis-à-vis such technologies outside the scope of criminal justice;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
C a. Whereas it is essential to provide an appropriate and comprehensive legal framework on the ethical aspect related to these technologies as well as on the liability, transparency and accountability (in particular for AI, robotics and related technologies considered to be high risk), that reflect the intrinsically European and universal humanist values, to be applicable to the entire value chain in the development, implementation and uses of IA; whereas that this ethical framework must apply to the development (including research and innovation), deployment and use of IA, in full respect of Union law and the values set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that artificial intelligence can be defined as a set of methods and procedures that enable technical systems to perceive their environment, deal with what is perceived and solve problems independently, take decisions, act and learn from the consequences of such decisions and actions;deleted
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. ‘AI-system’ means a system that is either software-based or embedded in hardware devices, and that displays behaviour simulating intelligence by, inter alia, collecting and processing data, analysing and interpreting its environment, and by taking action, with some degree of autonomy, to achieve specific goals. 'autonomous’ means an AI-system that operates by interpreting certain input and by using a set of pre- determined instructions, without being limited to such instructions, despite the system’s behaviour being constrained by and targeted at fulfilling the goal it was given and other relevant design choices made by its developer;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that all military uses of AI mustAI used in a military and a civil context have to be subject to human control, so that, in particular, a human has the opportunityat all times the means to correct or halt them at anyll times, and to disable them in the event of unforeseen behaviour;at all times when AI used in a military and a civil context have effects on the welfare and general interest of citizens.
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Considers that the respect for international public law, in particular humanitarian law, which applies unequivocally to all weapons systems and their operators, is a fundamental requirement with which Member States must comply, especially when it comes to protecting the civilian population or taking precautionary measures in the event of an attack such as military and cyberwarfare;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Urges the EU to take the lead and assume an active role in promoting a global AI regulatory framework
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Calls on the United Nations and the international community at large to make every effort to ensure that the application of AI, robotics and related technologies in military matters and the use of AI-based systems by the military remain within the strict limits set by international law and international humanitarian law;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2 d. Calls on the AI research community to integrate this principle into all the aforementioned AI-based systems intended for use in war; considers that no authority may establish any exception to those principles or certify such system;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2 e. Considers that the development and AI used in a military context in armed conflict has to respect the Martens clause and must never breach or be permitted to breach the dictates of public conscience and humanity, considers that ability to be used in compliance with international humanitarian law is the minimum standard for the admissibility of an AI-based system in a war context;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that their decision- making process must be auditable, explainable, traceable, so that the human decision-maker can be identified and held responsible where necessaryaccountable;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Stresses that during the use of AI in a military context, Member States, parties to a conflict and individuals must at all times comply with their obligations under applicable international law and take responsibility for actions resulting from the use of such systems and that under all circumstances must the anticipated, accidental or undesirable actions and effects of AI-based systems be considered to be the responsibility of Member States, parties to a conflict and individuals;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Highlights the importance of taking into account the risks related to accidental intervention, to manipulation, proliferation,cyber-attacks or interference and acquisition by third parties of AI- based technology, at any time;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Reiterates that regulatory efforts are supported by meaningful certification and surveillance schemes, as well as clear auditability, explainability, accountability, and traceability mechanisms, so that the regulatory framework does not become outdated by technological developments.
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates that theyAI used in a military context must always be consistent with international humanitarian and Human Rights laws, in particular the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, notably as regards the protection of injured, sick and shipwrecked persons, the treatment of prisoners of war and the protection of civilians;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Insists that they must always be consistent with the principle of proportionadistinction, proportionality, precaution, accountability, attributability, traceability, reliability, trustworthiness, transparency and explicability, which makes the legality of a military action conditional on a balance between the objective pursued and the means used, and that the assessment of proportionality must be made, or expressly approved, by a human being;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that the previous paragraphs concern all military uses of AI, whatever they may be, including those involving the processing of information for military purposes, military logistics, ‘collaborative combat’ and real-time support for decision-making, as well as defensive systems and all weapons that use AI, including lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS);
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Stress the need for predictability and reliability of the IA-enabled, as well as resilience and the system ability to detect possible changes in circumstances and operational environment.
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls that LAWS are weapons capable of identifying a target and deciding to attack it without human interventionthe term "lethal autonomous weapons systems" (LAWS) refers to weapons systems without meaningful human control over the critical functions of selection and attacking individual targets, and that the level of threat they pose requires that their use have to be subject to specific prohibitions and legal safeguards;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Insists on the need for an EU-wide strategy against lethal autonomous systems and a ban on so-called "killer robots".
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Emphasizes that the AI used in a military context, must meet a minimum set of requirements, namely: be able to distinguish between combatants and non- combatants, combatants on the battlefield, recognize when a combatant surrenders or is hors de combat, not to have indiscriminate effects, not to cause unnecessary suffering to people, not being biased or trained on data and comply with the principles of international humanitarian law, proportionality in the use of force and precaution before intervention;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8 c. Considers that the use of lethal autonomous weapon systems raises fundamental ethical and legal questions about the control capacity that humans can exercise over these systems; and requires that AI-based technology can´t make autonomous decisions involving legal principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that LAWS are lawfulcan be authorized only if subject to control sufficiently strict to enable a human to take over command at anya strict human control to enable a human to have the control all times, and that systems without any human control (‘human out of the loop’) musthave to be banned;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Highlight that meaningful human intervention and supervision are essential in the process of making lethal decisions, since human beings are still responsible when deciding between life and death;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9 b. Calls the Vice President of the Commission/High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR), the Member States and the European Council to develop and adopt as a matter of urgency, common position on autonomous weapons systems that ensure meaningful human control over the critical functions of weapons systems, including during deployment, and to speak in relevant forums with one voice and act accordingly; calls, in this context, on the VP/HR, the Member States and the Council to share best practices and garner input from experts, academics and civil society, as reflected in the 12 September 2018position on autonomous weapons systems, which states that attacks should always be carried out with significant human intervention;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses that LAWS should be used only in clearly defined cases and in accordance with authorisation procedures laid down in detail in advance in documents to which the State concerned — whether or not it forms part of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation — guarantees access for the public, or at least for its national parliament;deleted
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 73 #
11. Considers that LAWS must comply with the provisions of the Convention of 10 October 1980 on Certain Conventional Weapons, including the prohibition of weapons deemed ‘excessively injurious’;deleted
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Recalls that the purpose of the European Defence Fund (EDF) is to finance military research projects conducive to innovation, especially those implementing AI, even when they concern LAWS;deleted
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Suggests that the EDF remind the companies whose projects it finances and the States concerned that its funding does not absolve them of the responsibility to pay scrupulous attention to ensuring that any future military uses of the AI involved in these projects comply with the principles set out in paragraphs 2 to 13 of this report;deleted
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Recalls that Parliament’s resolution of 16 February 2017 with recommendations to the Commission on Civil Law Rules on Robotics asked the Commission to consider the designation of a European Agency for Artificial Intelligence, the mandate of which would cover common standards, certification and monitoring frameworks, as well as strong bilateral cooperation with NATO when it comes to the deployment, development and us of AI in the military field;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4
State authority: examples from the areas of health and justice and responsibility in all its applications
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses that Member States must ensure that the possession of highly sophisticated AI technologies by powerful private groups does result in the authority of the state being challenged, let alone usurped, by a private authority;deleted
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Stresses the importance of recognizing the decisions of public authorities that affect citizens and therefore, be subject to strict criteria of control in their security, transparency, accountability, non-discrimination, social and environmental responsibility, among others; likewise, the techniques of remote recognition such as facial recognition, used by the authorities and in public places, should also be subject to strict criteria for their development, deployment and use, and be submitted to democratic scrutiny and debate, and judicial review where necessary, and they should and respect for the use of personal data generated an processed, in order to preserve respect for fundamental rights, human dignity, autonomy and sef- determination of the individual;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Considers it essential, where an AI system is used to interact with people in public services, especially in the fields of justice and health care, that users arthat users should have the right and be informed that they may ask to deal with a professional and that the request will be granted without undue delay;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Takes the view that persons who have been the subject of a decision taken by a public authority based solely or largely onon, or influenced by the output from an AI system should be informed thereof and should receive the information referred to in the preceding paragraph without delay;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Notes that artificial intelligence is playing an increasingly fundamental role in areas such as public health, care, in particular through algorithms to assist diagnosis, robot- assisted surgery, smart prostheses, personalised treatments based on the three-dimensional modelling of an individual patient’s body, social robots to help elderly people, digital therapies designed to improve the independence of some mentally ill people, predictive medicine and epidemic response softwareulture, transport, agriculture, etc... in particular through algorithms, computer software and the data used or produced by them, that may be applied while using IA;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Insists, nevertheless, that all uses of AI in the area of public health must guarantee the protection of patients’ personal data and prevent the uncontrolled dissemination of those data;deleted
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Urges that all uses of AI in the area of public health uphold the principle of the equal treatment of patients as regards the accessibility of and access to treatment, preserve the patient-doctor relationship and be consistent with the Hippocratic Oath at all times;deleted
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21 a. Insists that all uses of AI in the public sphere, respect the protection of citizens' personal data and prevent the uncontrolled dissemination of those data; also urges respect for the equality of citizens, in terms of accessibility and effective access to public services and the preservation of the relationship between administration and citizen;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Notes that AI is increasingly being used in the field of justice, to enable judges to take decisions which are more rational and more in keeping with the law in force and to do so more quickly;deleted
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Calls, therefore, for requests that the public musto be informed of all suchny uses of AI in the field of justice and for thosepublic civil uses and that such uses do not to leadgive rise to discrimination resulting from the programming and to upholdhat the right of every individualany person to have access to a judgepublic official be respected, as well as the right of every judgeany public official to departviate from the solution suggested by the AI wheren he or she considerdeems it necessary in the light of the particulars of a casedetails of the matter in question;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23 a. Requests, therefore, that all these uses in the public and administrative sphere constitute information in the public domain and avoid generating discrimination due to programming biases;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Stresses that the circulation of autonomous vehicles in the European area(technology considered high risk) in Europe, which is liable to give rise to a particularly high number of disputes under international private law, must be the subject of specific European rules stipulating the legal regime applicable in the event of transboundary damage;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
27. Recalls that AI is a scientific advance which must not undermine the law, but must on the contrary always be governed by it — in the European Union by the law emanating from its institutions and its Member States — and that under no circumstances must the power of algorithms lead toAI, robotics and related technologies contravene democracy and, the rule of law being flouted, a principle which has guided the drafting of this reportand the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
2020/09/15
Committee: JURI