Author:
Simões Agapito Leonardo,de Alencar e Miranda Matheus,Januário Túlio Felippe Xavier
Abstract
Scientific and technological developments in the field of autonomous systems and artificial intelligence have provided and boosted their use in the most varied sectors of society. It is no different with activities carried out within the scope of criminal justice. Examples of these technologies being used in criminal investigations and procedures, including in assisting judgments, are increasingly frequent. However, it did not take long for questions to be raised regarding the limits of these systems and their possible impacts on the individuals’ guarantees. Although we cannot deny that some particularities of these technologies, especially of AI (such as the opacity and unpredictability of its output), pose risks to some fundamental guarantees in criminal proceedings, there is, in our view, at the basis of many doctrinal criticisms, a certain misunderstanding on what these technologies actually are, how they operate and how they are being used in the justice system. In view of this scenario, the aim of the present paper is precisely to investigate how artificial intelligence and autonomous systems have been used in criminal justice, so that we can identify what are, in fact, their potential impacts on Defendants’ rights and guarantees. For this, we will initially study the concept and operation of these technologies, so that we can understand their particularities. Subsequently, we will analyze their concrete application in the judicial sphere. For that, we will adopt as object of study, two of the best known systems of judicial assistance – HART and COMPAS – and the system used in Brazil, namely, the VICTOR. From the conclusions reached in the first two topics and applying the deductive methodology, we will seek to demystify some legends related to the so-called “robot judge”, identifying what are, in fact, its potentials and limits and which are the guarantees that are at stake.
Publisher
Institut za uporedno pravo; Institut za kriminološka i sociološka istraživanja
Reference54 articles.
1. Agapito, L. S., Miranda, M. A., Januário, T. F. X. (2021) "On the Potentialities and Limitations of Autonomous Systems in Money Laundering Control", RIDP 92(1), 87-108.
2. Braithwaite, J. (2013) "Does restorative justice work?" in: Johnstone, G. A restorative justice reader. 2.ed. London: Routledge, 320-352.
3. Traditional justice;Braithwaite;in Llewellyn et al (eds ) Restorative Justice Reconciliation and Peacebuilding New York Oxford University Press,2014
4. Many doors to international criminal justice;Braithwaite;New Criminal Law Review,2020
5. Bosi, A. (1992) Dialética da colonização. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Corporate Internal Investigations 4.0;Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal;2023-06-30