Activities of Emmanuel MAUREL related to 2020/2013(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on artificial intelligence: questions of interpretation and application of international law in so far as the EU is affected in the areas of civil and military uses and of state authority outside the scope of criminal justice
Amendments (5)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights that the security and defence policies of the European Union and its Member States ar, subject to the obligations arising from the North Atlantic Treaty and their operational implementation by the United States, endeavour to be guided by the principles of the UNnited Nations Charter, and by a common understanding of the universal values of the inviolable and inalienable rights of the human person, of freedom, of democracy, of equality and of the rule of law; highlights that all defence-related efforts within the Union framework must respect these universal values while promoting peace, security and progress in Europe and in the world;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers in particular that AI- enabled systems must abide by the principles of the Martens Clause, and must never breach or be permitted to breach the dictates of the public conscience and humanity; considers that this is the ultimate test for the admissibility of an AI-enabled system in warfare; calls on the AI research community to integrate this principle in all AI-enabled systems intended to be used in warfare; considers that no authority can issue a derogation from those principles or certify an AI-enabled system; therefore invites Russia and the United States, who are the main developers of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS), to halt all design, prototyping and production of such systems;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the need for robust testing and evaluation systems based on norms to ensure that during the entire lifecycle of AI-enabled systems in the military domain, in particular during the phases of human- machine interaction, machine learning and adjusting and adapting to new circumstances, the systems do not go beyond the intended limits and will at all times comply with the applicable international law; considers that, in the hypothetical event of these limits being overstepped in a theatre of operations, those civilian or military authorities which deployed AI systems should be held to account, including before the International Criminal Court (ICC);
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Highlights that any AI-enabled system used in the military domain, particularly by NATO members, must, as a minimum set of requirements, be able to distinguish between combatants and non- combatants on the battlefield, not have indiscriminate effects, not cause unnecessary suffering to persons, not be biased or be trained on biased data, and be in compliance with the IHL principles of military necessity, proportionality in the use of force and precaution prior to engagement;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the HR/VP, in the framework of the ongoing discussions on the international regulation of lethal autonomous weapon systems by states parties to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), to help streamline the global debate on core issues and definitions where consensus has not been reached, - as a result of obstruction on the part of certain countries, particularly the United States and Russia - in particular as regards concepts and characteristics of AI-enabled lethal autonomous weapons and their functions in the identification, selection and engagement of a target, application of the concept of human responsibility in the use of AI-enabled systems in defence, and the degree of human/machine interaction, including the concept of human control and judgment, during the different stages of the lifecycle of an AI-enabled weapon.