Surveillance Technologies, Wrongful Criminalisation, and the Presumption of Innocence

Hadjimatheou, Katerina

doi:10.1007/s13347-016-0218-2

Cited by 8 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…eu/ en/ press/ press-relea ses/ 2023/ 01/ 25/ elect ronic-evide nce-counc il-confi rms-agree ment-with-the-europ ean-parli ament-on-newrules-to-impro ve-cross-border-access-to-e-evide nce/. Next, practical initiatives, such as the establishment of the e-evidence digital exchange system (eEDES) and the creation of the e-CODEX system and the JITs Collaboration Platform, are also under development: Hamran (2020), p. 2. tools a criminal justice system may leverage not only to convict but also to prevent wrongful convictions (Fairfield and Luna 2014;Hadjimatheou 2017). This possibility is not, nor should be considered, a "free pass" to criminal proceedings inasmuch as a decision on trustworthiness and reliability is still pending-with forensic evidence of the third (?)…”

Section: Machine Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Going beyond the “common suspects”: to be presumed innocent in the era of algorithms, big data and artificial intelligence

Sachoulidou

2023

Artif Intell Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the trend of increasing automation in law enforcement and criminal justice settings through three use cases: predictive policing, machine evidence and recidivism algorithms. The focus lies on artificial-intelligence-driven tools and technologies employed, whether at pre-investigation stages or within criminal proceedings, in order to decode human behaviour and facilitate decision-making as to whom to investigate, arrest, prosecute, and eventually punish. In this context, this article first underlines the existence of a persistent dilemma between the goal of increasing the operational efficiency of police and judicial authorities and that of safeguarding fundamental rights of the affected individuals. Subsequently, it shifts the focus onto key principles of criminal procedure and the presumption of innocence in particular. Using Article 6 ECHR and the Directive (EU) 2016/343 as a starting point, it discusses challenges relating to the protective scope of presumption of innocence, the burden of proof rule and the in dubio pro reo principle as core elements of it. Given the transformations law enforcement and criminal proceedings go through in the era of algorithms, big data and artificial intelligence, this article advocates the adoption of specific procedural safeguards that will uphold rule of law requirements, and particularly transparency, fairness and explainability. In doing so, it also takes into account EU legislative initiatives, including the reform of the EU data protection acquis, the E-evidence Proposal, and the Proposal for an EU AI Act. Additionally, it argues in favour of revisiting the protective scope of key fundamental rights, considering, inter alia, the new dimensions suspicion has acquired.

show abstract

Section: Machine Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Going beyond the “common suspects”: to be presumed innocent in the era of algorithms, big data and artificial intelligence

Sachoulidou

2023

Artif Intell Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Facial Recognition for Preventive Purposes: The Human Rights Implications of Detecting Emotions in Public Spaces

Rezende

2022

Legal Studies in International, European and Comparative Criminal Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Police departments are increasingly relying on surveillance technologies to tackle public security issues in smart cities. Automated facial recognition is deployed in public spaces for real-time identification of suspects and warranted individuals. In some cases, law enforcement is going even further by exploiting also emotion recognition technologies. In preventive operations indeed, emotion facial recognition (EFR) is being used to infer individuals' inner affective states from traits like facial muscle movements. In this way, law enforcement aims to obtain insightful hints on unknown persons acting suspiciously in public or strategic venues (e.g. train stations, airports). While the employment of such tools still seems to be relegated to dystopian scenarios, it is already a reality in some parts of the world. Hence, there emerges a need to explore their compatibility with the European human rights framework. The Chapter undertakes this task and examines whether and how EFR can be considered compliant with the rights to privacy and data protection, the freedom of thought and the presumption of innocence.Isadora Neroni Rezende is a PhD Candidate in Law, Science and Technology -Rights of the Internet of Everything.

show abstract

Using artificial intelligence to prevent crime: implications for due process and criminal justice

Blount

2022

AI & Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surveillance Technologies, Wrongful Criminalisation, and the Presumption of Innocence

Cited by 8 publications

References 18 publications

Going beyond the “common suspects”: to be presumed innocent in the era of algorithms, big data and artificial intelligence

Going beyond the “common suspects”: to be presumed innocent in the era of algorithms, big data and artificial intelligence

Facial Recognition for Preventive Purposes: The Human Rights Implications of Detecting Emotions in Public Spaces

Using artificial intelligence to prevent crime: implications for due process and criminal justice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About