Affiliation:
1. University of Warsaw , Poland
2. Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw , Poland
Abstract
Abstract
The aim of the article is to prepare an analysis in order to formulate propositions regarding the digitalisation of Polish criminal proceedings as regards the administration of justice. These hypotheses would have merited consideration even pre-pandemic, but they demand even more attention as a result of the pandemic. The pandemic has served to highlight the pre-existing necessity to adapt criminal law to the latest observable technical and technological advances. In light of the above, the first issue to be analysed concerns the conditions, procedures, and possibilities surrounding the collection of evidence electronically, taking into account the most recent relevant guidelines of the Council of Europe. The second issue to be examined will be the adaptation of criminal procedures, including Polish, to the standards stipulated in the Convention of the Council of Europe on Cybercrime of 23 November 2001, in light of national norms regarding evidence gathering. The third issue that will be assessed in this study will be the benefits, risks, or potential of the application of artificial intelligence algorithms in criminal procedure. The consideration of each of the three areas will have regard to the present global pandemic. The article concludes with a concise summary containing the authors’ conclusions and propositions de lege ferenda.
Reference55 articles.
1. André A., The Information Technology Revolution in Health Centre, (in :) A. André (ed.), Digital Medicine, Cham 2019.10.1007/978-3-319-98216-8_1
2. Boni B., Creating a Global Consensus Against Cybercrime, “Network Security” 2001, no. 9.10.1016/S1353-4858(01)00918-7
3. Boratyńska K., M. Królikowski, Komentarz do art. 167, (in) A. Sakowicz (ed.), Kodeks postępowania karnego. Komentarz, Warszawa 2016.
4. Bowrey K., Ethical Boundaries and Internet Cultures, (in:) L. Bently, S. Maniatis (eds.), Intellectual Property and Ethics, London 1998.
5. Bradley C., Intent, Presumptions, and Non-Self-Executing Treaties, “The American Journal of International Law” 2008, no. 102(3).10.2307/20456642
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