During the plenary session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg (4-7 October 2021), MEPs debate on the Artificial intelligence in criminal law and its use by the police and judicial authorities in criminal matters. Opening statements by Petar VITANOV (S&D, BG), rapporteur and by Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs. This transcription speech is the result of an automatic process. Check against delivery.

statement

debate

plenary session

use of robotics and artificial intelligence (T)

VITANOV, Petar (S&D, BG)

JOHANSSON, Ylva (SE, EC)

Artificial intelligence in criminal law and its use by the police and judicial authorities in criminal matters: opening statements by Petar VITANOV (S&D, BG), rapporteur and by Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs

SOUNDBITE (English), Petar VITANOV (S&amp;D, BG), Thank you, President, Commissioner, honourable colleagues. The EU regulatory framework needs to catch up with the technical developments. The use of A.I. has been growing exponentially, and this brings the question what we as co-legislators are doing to safeguard the fundamental rights of the European citizens.

SOUNDBITE (English), Petar VITANOV (S&D, BG), Now, AI is not the product itself, but it's a method, it's it's a tool, and as such, it needs to be conditioned to the overarching goal of improving the well-being of our citizens. The technology caused great promise if it's developed and used in an ethical and trustworthy manner, but at the same time implies considerable risks for fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law.

SOUNDBITE (English), Petar VITANOV (S&D, BG), As co-legislators, we bear enormous responsibility towards the European citizens. We need to draw real clear red lines. For AI based systems that violate fundamental rights, if we are serious about safeguarding people's safety and well-being, we need to include in the future legislation that can possibly ban or prohibit applications of AI that are incompatible with the fundamental rights.

SOUNDBITE (English), Petar VITANOV (S&D, BG), Technical problems should never come at the expense of the people from fundamental rights, and it's not a question of whether the AI systems have the potential to result in racially biased and discriminatory outcomes. We actually know for sure that this is the case. We see the confirmation of this in the data provided by multiple NGOs.

SOUNDBITE (English), Petar VITANOV (S&D, BG), We saw it during the LIBE mission to Washington last year and just a couple of weeks ago, we heard it from the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, and no AI is a dangerous only when used by autocratic governments. When technologies is float it's float no matter who uses and for what purposes, the good intentions does not justify the means.

SOUNDBITE (English), Petar VITANOV (S&D, BG), There have been numerous cases of people being treated unjustly because of AI, such as being denied Social Security benefit because of faulty AI tools or even arrested because of all facial recognition. And somehow, I am not surprised that the victims are always the poor, the immigrants, the coloured or the Eastern Europeans.

SOUNDBITE (English), Petar VITANOV (S&D, BG), American Civil Liberties Union demonstrated to the US Congress in May 2019 that the error rate with facial recognition of colour people is higher, basically leading to de facto discrimination.

SOUNDBITE (English), Petar VITANOV (S&D, BG), They describe facial recognition technology as unregulated, dangerous, racially biased and often untested, using facial recognition in public areas may interfere with a person's freedom of opinion expression simply because of the fact that the protections group anonymity no longer exists if everyone in the groups potentially to be recognised.

SOUNDBITE (English), Petar VITANOV (S&D, BG), This could lead to those individuals changing their behaviour, for example, by no longer participating in a peaceful strikes or demonstrations, predictive profiling and risk assessment, and ultimate decision making systems targeting individuals and profiled them as criminal, resulting in the serious criminal justice and civic outcomes and punishment before they have carried out the alleged action for which they are being profiled.

SOUNDBITE (English), Petar VITANOV (S&D, BG), And I always thought that this can happen all in the movie. In essence, the very purpose of the system is to undermine the fundamental right to be presumed innocent. And colleagues, I really hope that we can have a serious debate. I am looking forward to it, but I am pretty confident that we will place the fundamental rights before the technological progress and even before security, because there cannot be any security without freedom. Thank you.

SOUNDBITE (English), Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, Thank you, Mr. President, Dear Honourable members, I would like to thank you for this report and a special thanks to Mr. Petar Vitanov of for for this report. I hear I know that you are concerned about fundamental rights, and so am I. This summer, gangsters shot down and killed Dutch journalist in cold blood. An attack on a human being. An attack also on our society and our values on our fundamental rights.

SOUNDBITE (English), Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, The right to life, the freedom of expression. The freedom of media. Police caught the suspects within the hour with only a fragment of the getaway car's registration number, using state of the art camera systems, police forced the car to a standstill on the motorway. Smart digital technology used in defence of citizens that our fundamental rights. Without this technology, these criminals would have quite simply gotten away.

SOUNDBITE (English), Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, To protect both our people and their rights, digital technology is no longer a nice to have, but a need to have for law enforcement. First, because the massive amounts of data. In one German state last year, police seised 3000 terabytes of data in child sexual abuse investigations alone. They estimated it will take one police officer more than 2000 years to review.

SOUNDBITE (English), Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, And that's assuming an officer working eight hours a day looking at one picture every second. A computer processes these eight images, 10 to 20 times faster, at least 24 hours a day never gets tired. Makes fewer mistakes. Doesn't get sick by what they see. Does not need therapy. And time is of the essence in the EncroChat case, police captured hundreds of millions of messages with criminals plotting drug deals, violent crimes and even murder. Delays can cost lives.

SOUNDBITE (English), Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, Second, criminals increasingly use artificial intelligence to commit deception and fraud, cyber attacks and ransomware attacks. We can't ask the police to bring a knife to a gunfight. We must equip police with modern tools to fight modern crimes. Third, we need up to date information exchange to fight cross-border crime, and I will address this in the upcoming proposals on a police cooperation code and update of the framework.

SOUNDBITE (English), Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, I know you are concerned about the right to privacy and data protection. And I must stress we must both protect security and respect fundamental rights at the same time, that's essential for the trust of our citizens. We need to demystify technology and explain the strong safeguards that already exist.

SOUNDBITE (English), Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, A balanced approach and strong safeguards should govern law enforcement's use of technology anchored in national laws guarded by data protection authorities, subject to redress mechanisms and parliamentary oversight.

SOUNDBITE (English), Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, There is oversight on European level by, for example, the European Data Protection Supervisor and Joint Parliamentary Scrutiny Group on Europol, the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights have a build up body of case law that is relevant for the use of technology by law enforcement.

SOUNDBITE (English), Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, Procedural rights are already guaranteed the right to effective remedy to a fair trial. The rights of defence and the presumption of innocence. I also agree that an application must fulfil robust legal and technical requirements, in particular when they are used by public authorities. The legal accountability for the eventual harmful effect of such systems must be clearly assigned.

SOUNDBITE (English), Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, And this is why these issues issues are addressed in the commission proposed a regulation. We need a European approach to ensure safety of full respect of fundamental rights when artificial intelligence is used. The proposal recognised A.I. as a strategic tool for law enforcement to fight terrorism and organised crime.

SOUNDBITE (English), Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, The regulation will facilitate the use of artificial intelligence in a transparent, reliable and secure way, also for law enforcement authorities by providing clear rules. And I completely agree with you. There is no room for mass surveillance in our society. Our proposal bans mass social scoring and prohibits live biometric identification in public spaces, with a few very well-defined exceptions.

SOUNDBITE (English), Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, But police must be able to use AI and digital technology for high risk cases with a potential adverse impact on fundamental rights. AI must live up to the highest standards. It must be robust, secure and accurate. The quality of data must be exceptional. Its use must not lead to discriminate discriminatory or racist outcome, and it must be subject to human oversight.

SOUNDBITE (English), Ylva JOHANSSON, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, When artificial intelligence affects people, people must have have the final say. And again, we must protect both security and fundamental rights. And I'm convinced that we can, and this is what our citizens want. I hope that you are ready to work together with me to uphold our values and keep our citizens safe. Thank you.