202
THE POSITION OF USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLEGENCE IN LAW
ENFORCEMENT
A’zamova Gulbahor A’zamovna Master’s
student of Law enforcement academy of
the Republic of Uzbekistan E-mail:
Annotation.
This article discusses the theoretical and legal aspects
of the use of modern technologies, including a basis and goal-setting system
for the development of information systems, including the use of components
of artificial intelligence technologies aimed at solving specific and general
tasks of law enforcing and its effectiveness of the practical work carried out
in this regard.
Key words:
justice, digitization, artificial intelligence (AI), electronic
document circulation, judge, proof process.
In recent years, there is a certain unity between the representatives of
the state authorities and the scientific community in discussing the problems
of the development of artificial intelligence systems and the expansion of their
fields of application. Everyone agrees that these systems are necessary and
strives to meet the needs of modern society using the modern technologies
in every area of social communications. Reforms made in this area open a
door for the development of the country in this regard.
Decree of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated January
28, 2022 “On the development strategy of New Uzbekistan for 2022-2026”,
Decree of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated February 17,
2021 “On Measures to create conditions for the rapid ntroduction of artificial
intelligence technologies”, Decision“ On Measures to introduce a special
regime for the use of artificial intelligence technologies” dated August 26,
2021, Decree “On Approving the concept of development of science until
2030” dated October 29, 2020, Decree dated October 5, 2020 “On approving
203
the Strategy of “Digital Uzbekistan - 2030” and measures for its effective
implementation” and other normative legal documents related to the field will
serve as a framework for a research to be carried out in this regard.
In addition to the attention shown by official bodies, many
organizational and advisory, educational-methodical, scientific and
representative events are held every year at various levels on the problems
of using artificial intelligence systems in medicine, education, industry,
construction, state and municipal administration, science and others. The
potential of artificial intelligence technologies is not fully developed in the law.
The legislative process, legal interpretation, and law enforcement activities
are the areas that may be affected by computer and information technology
and, as it turns out, artificial intelligence systems.
Artificial intelligence is considered to be the process of creating
machines that can act in a way that is perceived as intelligent by humans
[1].Thus, it can be assumed that this system is the direction of development
of computer functions related to human intelligence, such as reasoning,
learning and problem solving. Given the imperfection of human mental activity
and its incomplete implementation, artificial intelligence claims very important
positions in people’s lives.
Veprev S.B. and Nesterovich S.A. believe that “... the limited
capabilities of the human brain force it to use the unique capabilities of human
speech to transform the initial data into a verbally saturated set of data.
Human thinking, by nature, is, in most cases, speculative” [2]. In other words,
artificial intelligence is a transfer of human possibilities of our activities in the
plane of computer and information technologies, but without human vices. It
is this concept that we base on the development of the problem of artificial
intelligence in law enforcement.
Of course, we are far from pioneers in this direction. Many studies on
this topic include not only general legal, but also criminal-procedural
sciences. However, every work in this field serves only as an attempt to solve
the problem of using artificial intelligence in the criminal procedure, not a
204
solution. Maybe we cannot get away from it either. No matter how surprising
this is, there is an explanation for this: the independent full- fledged research
of artificial intelligence and its possibilities in law in general and in law
enforcement is a process, in particular, that is not under the control of lawyers
in principle. Creating algorithms for solving problem situations requires
special knowledge in mathematics, engineering, linguistics, management,
psychology and information technology, and special legal knowledge to adapt
the developed algorithms to a specific field of science. The success of
exploring the possibilities of artificial intelligence in the law enforcement will
depend only on the one-time use of that and other knowledge.
Scientific and methodological studies often focused on the
professional thinking of representatives of various specialties: military
personnel, teachers, doctors, financiers, lawyers, and others. Each
profession with sufficient complexity and depth, determining the difficulty of
mastering it, assumes that relevant specialists have certain characteristics of
mental activity, which can be considered not only in the context of
professional deformation and the resulting systematic errors, but in general,
the structure of such thinking in terms of matching operations. This study
reflects two functions of modern science: explanation and prediction. The first
part of the work is devoted to explaining the phenomenon of criminal thinking,
the second part is devoted to explaining the nature of artificial intelligence
technology related to thinking and predicting the possibilities of its use in the
detection and investigation of crimes [3].
Professional thinking reflects the qualitative characteristics of a
person, which can be evaluated in terms of the professionalism of the activity
and the professionalism of the person. In this case, it is often about the latter.
Despite the fact that the idea of the need to study criminal thinking with the
help of criminology is not universally recognized among criminologists, this
need arises from the two-fold formulation of the traditional definition of the
object of criminology: if the activity and thinking of the criminal should be
studied (without the criminal). The second, the modus operandi cannot be
205
studied), similarly, there must be room for reflection within the criminology
personnel involved in the fight against crime.
English criminologist Dror I.E. “after decades of neglecting the
importance of the human factor in forensic science. The realization that the
human factor plays a decisive role is of great importance for forensic
examination.”[4] Thus, in mathematical statistics: “all models are wrong, but
some models can be useful.” The criminal reasoning model presented in the
dissertation study inevitably contains significant simplifications, and as a
result, there may be some inaccuracies, such as a mathematical model that
works on the basis of approximate values.
The main preliminary hypothesis of the study was the thesis that the
intelligent system activity, which fully corresponds to the tasks and functions
of the activities of the participants in the investigation of crimes, should be
developed based on the study of the thinking of the subject to be optimized.
Using such a system, because this thinking is a necessary condition for both
effective work and errors. The purpose of the work is to develop a general
theory of using AI in criminal proceedings, which consists of the development
of a theoretical understanding based on the synthesis of modern
achievements of cognitive sciences, technical knowledge related to
computer, and the relevant model of forensic thinking, existing private
forensic theories; formulating practical forensic recommendations for
improving the preliminary investigation process, as well as studying the
current state of artificial intelligence technologies from the point of view of
using theoretical and practical rules of criminal thinking in their development
and operation.
The perception of the dynamic information system of the investigation
process can be presented in three different forms: situational, causal and
functional. The dividing line between these forms is expressed in the form of
communication in the criminal thinking of the subject, who knows the classical
categories of
“cause”, “action” and “effect” for philosophy and logic. In the first
case, the relationship “action in consequences” is most clearly accepted,
206
causal thinking mainly works with the relationship “cause forming effect”, and
functional thinking relies on th
e dynamics of “cause forming action, action
forming consequences”[5]. Differences also exist in other elements of these
approaches, for example, in the placement of the subject of knowledge or in
the application to different departments of forensic science and types of
practical actions, etc.
The situational aspects of the forensic thinking of the investigator can
be presented as follows: the situation reflecting the investigative situation
which allows to study the information array of available data, to identify the
missing components (consequences) of the trace picture in it, and thus to
simulate the necessary actions. For the investigator, situational thinking is
essentially an advanced state of mind and reflection as a reflection of the
surrounding reality.
There is a direct connection between the development dynamics of
the information structure of the investigation and the development dynamics
of the investigation situation. In many respects, the information model of the
investigation corresponds to the real investigative situation that arose in the
criminal case (this is especially typical for problematic situations), but in some
cases, some of its aspects are not included in the information-version
structure of the investigation. As the most important logical-heuristic tool of
the investigator, the version should have two properties - partial (limited,
incomplete) validity and informative. Validity should be understood as a
feature that reflects the relationship of the investigative version to the set of
facts that are the basis of information for its formation in the mind of the
investigator. In order to recognize the judgment of a certain investigator as a
version, it must have a certain degree of a priori probability[6].
Artificial intelligence technology means the volume of all objective
information (natural-technical and socio-humanitarian, including forensic,
nature) about the essence, forms and activities of artificial intelligence, as well
as the practical and experimental application of this information. A specific
implementation of such technology in the form of a practical or experimental
207
technological solution with rationality and autonomy is called an artificial
intelligence system.
Artificial intelligence can be understood in a multidimensional way[7]:
>
as a practical computer system;
>
as a field of fundamental scientific knowledge;
>
as a subject of scientific knowledge;
>
as a method of solving scientific and other problems;
>
as a sign of a technological system.
It has been proven that the use of systems based on artificial
intelligence technologies for the needs of crime detection and investigation
activities, as well as other “superstructure” of any type of activity, involves
dependence on two groups of factors: external, describing the actual
manifestation of the activity, and internal, describing the thought processes.
There are different views on the use of artificial intelligence in the
judiciary. In particular, according to Nikos Aletras, the leader of a group of
scientists from the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Sheffield,
AI is unlikely to completely replace judges and lawyers, but the technology
could be very useful for them. This is because it can serve as an important
tool to prioritize important court cases, as well as to quickly
identify decisions that contravene the European Convention on Human
Rights [8].
According to Lawrence Lessing, a professor at Harvard Law School,
artificial intelligence can cover a much wider range of legal practice. However,
it is not desirable for artificial intelligence to manage all processes
independently. The judge should be provided with the ability to intervene at
any time and change the situation in the right direction [9].
In this regard, it is worth talking about the advantages and
disadvantages of introducing artificial intelligence in criminal proceedings.
And applying to artificial intelligence in law enforcing system should be
fulfilled step by step taking the risks and advantages at the same time in
collaboration with the qualified team on this.
208
Since the process of criminal prosecution can directly affect the fate
of a person, any mistake made by him can lead to the possibility of violation
of human rights and freedoms. Since artificial intelligence cannot only reflect
human emotions, it cannot be guaranteed that it will strictly adhere to the
principles of criminal procedure.
As for the advantages of artificial intelligence, its use in the criminal
process allows to prevent the negative influence of individuals and thus to
ensure the objectivity of decisions, to reduce the duration of proceedings, to
increase efficiency, and to execute. Analytical and other actions that are not
carried out by the individual, the expansion of crime, saving the budget and
many other positive results can be achieved.
References:
1.
Джонс М. Т. Программирование искусственного интеллекта в
приложениях / М. Тим Джонс; Пер. с англ. Осипов А. И. М.: ДМК Пресс,
2011. С. 15.
2.
Вепрев С.Б., Нестерович С.А. Экспертные системы в
юридической деятельности // Научно - практический электронный
журнал Аллея Науки. 2017. № 13. С. 990 - 991
3.
Вепрев С.Б., Нестерович С.А. Экспертные системы в
юридической деятельности // Научно - практический электронный
журнал Аллея Науки. 2017. № 13. С. 986.
4. Dror I. E. Cognitive neuroscience in forensic science:
understanding and utilizing the human element // Philosophical transactions
of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences. 2015. № 370.
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2014.0255.
5.
Бахтеев Д. В., О связи криминалистики и технологии
искусственного интеллекта // Сибирские уголовно-процессуальные и
криминалистические
чтения.
2022.
№1
(35).
URL:
https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/o-svyazi-kriminalistiki-i-tehnologii-
iskusstvennogo-intellekta
6.
Бахтеев Д. В., О связи криминалистики и технологии
искусственного интеллекта // Сибирские уголовно-процессуальные и
криминалистические
чтения.
2022.
№1
(35).
URL:
https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/o-svyazi-kriminalistiki-i-tehnologii-
iskusstvennogo-intellekta
209
7.
Бахтеев, Д. В. Автономные боевые системы: этикоправовой
подход /
Д. В. Бахтеев // Российское право онлайн. - № 3. - 2021. -С. 61-65.
-
0,3 п. л.
8. AletrasN, Tsarapatsanis D, Preotiuc-Pietro D, Lampos V.
2016. Predicting judicial decisions of the European Court of Human Rights:
a Natural Language Processing perspective. PeerJ Computer
Science 2:e93
https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.93. Accessed 23rd Aug 2020
.
9.
Искусственный интеллект приведет к
мaссoвoму
изгнению ширoкoгo
плaстa юристов // Интервью с
.^урентом
Лессигом.
URL:
https://zakon.ru/discussion/2019/05/22/iskusstvennyj_intellekt_privedyot_k _
massovomu_izgnaniyu_shirokogo_plasta_yuristov _____ intervyu_s_louren
(дaтaoбрaщения: 26.10.2023).
10.
Хамедов, И. "Открытость государственного управления как
принцип и механизм." Жамият ва бошқарув 2 (2013).
11.
Хамедов,
Иса.
"Некоторые
вопросы
дальнейшей
демократизации и модернизации государственной власти и управления
и административно-правового обеспечения этих процессов в
Республике Узбекистан." Общество и управление 1.1 (2013): 14-25.
