Concludes, should regulate said instrument and the powers of the CGPJ over it.
Norm Opportunity The report proposal includes a reflection on the timeliness of the draft from two perspectives. The first of these analyses, linked to the efficiency objective , warns of the risk posed by the approval of this law without the procedural and organizational framework designed in the other two efficiency laws having been established sufficiently in advance. The technological model could be disconnected from the organizational and procedural reality to which it must be applied. (Photo: E&J) Secondly, the efficiency, effectiveness and effectiveness of the measures and the proposed technological model are questioned when their implementation and application to judicial procedures can strain time-honored procedural principles and even be incompatible with the right to effective judicial protection .
The technological insufficiency of the Administration of Justice, the text warns, should not be overcome by violating established procedural principles such as orality, immediacy or publicity. The exercise of the jurisdictional function cannot become a mere technological activity far removed from the rights and legitimate interests of citizens. And he concludes that the Phone Number Data use of technologies must have an instrumental vocation and serve the purposes of the process. Artificial intelligence The draft report dedicates a section to the incorporation of artificial intelligence models to the electronic processing of judicial procedures and the issuance of judicial resolutions, regarding which it recalls that they have been classified as high risk by the European Commission in its Proposal for a Regulation establishing harmonized rules on artificial intelligence , of 21 April 2021 (COM (2021) 206 FINAL).
https://zh-cn.aobdirectory.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/dhfhtfyjy34w67u6r-300x150.jpg
For this reason, it considers that it would be reasonable to wait for the conclusion of the European legislative process in which national rules on this matter must be established. It also considers that the draft establishes a regulatory framework that is not very robust in relation to the use of artificial intelligence models and points out as especially significant the absence of any mention of the CGPJ despite the severe risks it entails for the guarantee of fundamental principles of our Rule of law. In this matter, the pre-legislator should maintain a position of caution and develop a complete and guaranteeing regulation of the use of artificial intelligence techniques in the scope of the exercise of the jurisdictional function.
頁:
[1]