IMPLICATIONS OF EU AI REGULATION FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming part of the judiciary worldwide. The use of artificial intelligence is different from country to country. While AI has the potential to enhance efficiency, accuracy, and decision-making, it also raises significant ethical and legal concerns, particularly regarding the right to a fair trial. Compared to other judicial procedures, the criminal procedure has specifics and is the most vulnerable to the use of artificial intelligence due to power imbalance. Specifically, criminal procedure directly influences citizens’ fundamental rights, including deprivation of liberty. Therefore, challenges identified in the use of artificial intelligence such as bias and discrimination have increased impact in criminal procedures. Beyond criminal procedure, artificial intelligence is used by investigative authorities before the criminal trial or even to prevent criminal acts, however, the same challenges and risks exist as for the criminal procedure. The artificial intelligence tools are developed by humans and inequalities that exist in the real criminal justice system will be reproduced in the AI tools.
The European Union (EU) and Council of Europe (CoE) are making efforts to develop a legal framework for the use of artificial intelligence in the judiciary. The article focuses on acts adopted by EU institutions on AI use in judiciary: European Parliament Resolution 2020/2016 (INI) Artificial intelligence in criminal law and its use by the police and judicial authorities in criminal matters, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonized rules on artificial intelligence and amending certain Union legislative acts (COM/2021/206 final) and CoE European Ethical Charter on the use of Artificial Intelligence in the judicial system and their environment.
Keywords: artificial intelligence, technology, fundamental rights, bias, criminal procedure.
Angwin, J., Larson, J., Mattu, S. & Kirchner, L. 2022. Machine Bias. In: Martin, K. (ed.) Ethics of Data and Analytics : Concepts and Cases. Auerbach Publications, pp. 264-275. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003278290-37
Baker, D. & Robinson, P. H. 2021. Artificial Intelligence and the Law – Cybercrime and Criminal Liability. London: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429344015
Brennan, T., Dieterich, W. & Ehret, B. 2009 Evaluating the predictive validity of the COMPAS Risk and Needs Assessment System. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36(1), pp. 21-40. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854808326545
Bouchagiar, G. 2024. Is Europe prepared for Risk Assessment Technologies in criminal justice? Lessons from the US experience. New Journal of European Criminal Law, 15(1), pp. 72-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844241228676
Costanzi, C. 2019. Big data e garantismo digitale. Le nuove frontiere della giustizia penale nel XXI secolo, Giustizia penale e nuove tecnologie. La Legislazione Penale, 2019 (12), pp. 1-16. Available at: https://www.lalegislazionepenale.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Costanzi_GP-nuove-tecnologie-LP_Rev.pdf (1. 10. 2024). https://doi.org/10.3280/MG2018-001002
Heaven, W. D. 2020. Predictive policing algorithms are racist. They need to be dismantled. MIT Technology Review. Available at: https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/07/17/1005396/predictive-policing-algorithms-racist-dismantled-machine-learning-bias-criminal-justice/ (1. 10. 2024).
Matić Bošković, M. 2022. Krivično procesno pravo EU. Beograd: Institut za kriminološka i sociološka istraživanja.
Matić Bošković, M. 2021. Impact of Modern Technologies on Free Movement of Evidence in European Union. Journal of Criminology and Criminal Law, 59(3), pp. 123-140. https://doi.org/10.47152/rkkp.59.3.6
Matić Bošković, M. & Nenadić, S. 2021. Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Criminal Justice Systems Across Europe. In: Duić, D. & Petrašević, T. (eds.), EU 2021 – The Future of the EU in and After the Pandemic. Osijek: Faculty of Law, University of Osijek, pp. 263-290. https://doi.org/10.25234/eclic/18307
Matić Bošković, M. 2020. Implications of New Technologies on Criminal Justice System. Journal of Eastern-European Criminal Law, 2, pp. 137-147.
Matić Bošković, M. & Kostić, J. 2019. Kućni zatvor: iskustva u primeni. In: Bejatović, S. (ed.), Izmene u krivičnom zakonodavstvu i statusu nosilaca pravosudnih funkcija i adekvatnost državne reakcije na kriminalitet (međunarodni pravni standardi i stanje u Srbiji). LIX redovno godišnje savetovanje udruženja. Srpsko udruženje za krivičnopravnu teoriju i praksu. Beograd: Intermex, pp. 216-229.
McDaniel, J. L. M. & Pease, K. G. 2021. Predictive Policing and Artificial Intelligence. New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429265365
Reiling, A. D. 2020. Courts and Artificial Intelligence. International Journal for Court Administration, 11(2), pp. 1-10. https://doi.org/10.36745/ijca.343
Sourdin, T. 2018. Judge v Robot? Artificial Intelligence and Judicial Decision-Making. University of New South Wales Law Journal (UNSWLJ), 41(4), pp. 1114-1133. https://doi.org/10.53637/ZGUX2213
Quattrocolo, S. 2020. Artificial Intelligence, Computational Modelling and Criminal Proceedings – A Framework for A European Legal Discussion. Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52470-8