法律挑战的技术解决方案:刑事诉讼中的权利平等

Q2 Social Sciences Global Jurist Pub Date : 2020-01-07 DOI:10.1515/gj-2019-0058
S. Quattrocolo, C. Anglano, M. Canonico, Marco Guazzone
{"title":"法律挑战的技术解决方案:刑事诉讼中的权利平等","authors":"S. Quattrocolo, C. Anglano, M. Canonico, Marco Guazzone","doi":"10.1515/gj-2019-0058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The paper focuses on how computational models and methods impact on current legal systems, and in particular, on criminal justice. While the discussion about the suitabilty of the exploitation of learning machines and Artificial Intelligence (AI) either as surveillance means and human substitutes in the judicial decision-making process is arising, the authors reflect upon the risk of using AI and algorithm-based evidence in criminal proceedings. The claim of the paper is twofold: on the one hand, we should reinterpret todays legal frameworks, e. g. the European Convention of Human Rights, shifting the attention from possible violations of the right to privacy to potential infringements on a basic fair trial feature, the Equality of Arms. On the other hand, we should aknowledge that main legal issues, triggered by the breathtaking advancements in AI, can properly be addressed mainly through technical solutions (e. g. methods for assessing the completeness and correctness of digital evidence related to mobile devices and conversations). No legal theory, which overlooks the crossover of juridical and computational expertise, will survive the present time.","PeriodicalId":34941,"journal":{"name":"Global Jurist","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/gj-2019-0058","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Technical Solutions for Legal Challenges: Equality of Arms in Criminal Proceedings\",\"authors\":\"S. Quattrocolo, C. Anglano, M. Canonico, Marco Guazzone\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/gj-2019-0058\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The paper focuses on how computational models and methods impact on current legal systems, and in particular, on criminal justice. While the discussion about the suitabilty of the exploitation of learning machines and Artificial Intelligence (AI) either as surveillance means and human substitutes in the judicial decision-making process is arising, the authors reflect upon the risk of using AI and algorithm-based evidence in criminal proceedings. The claim of the paper is twofold: on the one hand, we should reinterpret todays legal frameworks, e. g. the European Convention of Human Rights, shifting the attention from possible violations of the right to privacy to potential infringements on a basic fair trial feature, the Equality of Arms. On the other hand, we should aknowledge that main legal issues, triggered by the breathtaking advancements in AI, can properly be addressed mainly through technical solutions (e. g. methods for assessing the completeness and correctness of digital evidence related to mobile devices and conversations). No legal theory, which overlooks the crossover of juridical and computational expertise, will survive the present time.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34941,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Jurist\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/gj-2019-0058\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Jurist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/gj-2019-0058\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Jurist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/gj-2019-0058","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要本文主要关注计算模型和方法如何影响当前的法律体系,特别是刑事司法。虽然关于在司法决策过程中利用学习机器和人工智能(AI)作为监视手段和人类替代品的适用性的讨论正在兴起,但作者反思了在刑事诉讼中使用人工智能和基于算法的证据的风险。本文的主张是双重的:一方面,我们应该重新解释今天的法律框架,例如:《欧洲人权公约》,将人们的注意力从可能侵犯隐私权转移到可能侵犯公平审判的基本特征——武器平等。另一方面,我们应该认识到,由人工智能的惊人进步引发的主要法律问题,主要可以通过技术解决方案(例如:评估与移动设备和对话相关的数字证据的完整性和正确性的方法)。没有一种法律理论,如果忽视了司法和计算机专业知识的交叉,将会在当今生存下去。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Technical Solutions for Legal Challenges: Equality of Arms in Criminal Proceedings
Abstract The paper focuses on how computational models and methods impact on current legal systems, and in particular, on criminal justice. While the discussion about the suitabilty of the exploitation of learning machines and Artificial Intelligence (AI) either as surveillance means and human substitutes in the judicial decision-making process is arising, the authors reflect upon the risk of using AI and algorithm-based evidence in criminal proceedings. The claim of the paper is twofold: on the one hand, we should reinterpret todays legal frameworks, e. g. the European Convention of Human Rights, shifting the attention from possible violations of the right to privacy to potential infringements on a basic fair trial feature, the Equality of Arms. On the other hand, we should aknowledge that main legal issues, triggered by the breathtaking advancements in AI, can properly be addressed mainly through technical solutions (e. g. methods for assessing the completeness and correctness of digital evidence related to mobile devices and conversations). No legal theory, which overlooks the crossover of juridical and computational expertise, will survive the present time.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Jurist
Global Jurist Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Global Jurist offers a forum for scholarly cyber-debate on issues of comparative law, law and economics, international law, law and society, and legal anthropology. Edited by an international board of leading comparative law scholars from all the continents, Global Jurist is mindful of globalization and respectful of cultural differences. We will develop a truly international community of legal scholars where linguistic and cultural barriers are overcome and legal issues are finally discussed outside of the narrow limits imposed by positivism, parochialism, ethnocentrism, imperialism and chauvinism in the law. Submission is welcome from all over the world and particularly encouraged from the Global South.
期刊最新文献
‘The Food Must Reach the Hungry’: Lessons from Judicial Enforcement of Right to Food in India On the History of Water as a Human Right and Its Recognition in the Cuban Constitution Capitalising on Uncertainty: Exploring the Failure of International Law to Address the Risk Generated by the Proliferation of Space Debris Two Tales of the Energy Commons Through the Lens of Complexity Achieving a Common Future for all Through Sustainability-Conscious Legal Education and Research Methods
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1