11 Amendments of Adriana MALDONADO LÓPEZ related to 2020/2013(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that the obligation to respect and protect the dignity of the human person is a general principle of international law, the source and the main pillar of all fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, common to the constitutional traditions of EU Member States; stresses therefore that the principle of human dignity should always be the ultimate pattern of control when interpreting and applying the law on artificial intelligence and the essential element establishing the human-centric approach to artificial intelligence, directing its use towards the good of individuals, groups of users, consumers and society as a whole;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that in the COVID-19 health crisis, several Member States have launched the development of mobile apps to protect public health by alerting citizens to past contact with someone who has tested positive for the virus; calls for a common EU approach to AI-enabled mobile apps, the development of which must remain under state control; believes that the use of any tracing applications should remain voluntary and the data collected should be anonymous and should not be used neither for commercial nor for law enforcement purposes; stresses that such applications must be available only during the pandemic, and not run nor be usable during normal times;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that in the COVID-19 health crisis, several Member States have launched the development of mobile apps to protect public health by alerting citizens to past contact with someone who has tested positive for the virus; calls for a common EU approach to AI-enabled mobile apps, the development of which must remain under state control; considers that AI-enabled mobile apps must respect the privacy of European citizens and the General Data Protection Regulation;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that the principles of proportionality needs to be respected and that questions of causality and liability non- discrimination and proportionality and the requirement for justification need to be respected and that questions of causality, liability and responsibility, as well as transparency, accountability and explainability, need to be clarified to determine the extent to which the State as an actor in public international law, but also in exercising its own authority, can actually transfer that authority to systems based on AI, which have a certain autonomy;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that the principle of proportionality needs to be respected and that questions of causality and liability need to be clarified to determine the extent to which the State as an actor in public international law, but also in exercising its own authority, can actually transfer that authority to systems based on AI, which have a certain autonomy, without generating additional risks;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges, therefore, the Member States to assess the risks related to AI- driven technologies before automating activitiprofessional services connected with the exercise of State authority, such as the proper administration of justice, for example, the risks related to protection of consumers, of recipients of services and of workers, ensuring safe, healthy and secure working conditions, the proper administration of justice, ensuring high standards of education and protection of the environment; calls on the Member States to consider the need to provide for safeguards, foreseen in Directive (EU) 2018/958, such as supervision by a qualified professional and rules on professional ethics;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges, therefore, the Member States to assess the risks related to AI- driven technologies before automating activities connected with the exercise of State authority, such as the proper administration of justice; calls on the Member States to consider the need to provide for safeguards, foreseen in Directive (EU) 2018/958, such as supervision and monitoring by a qualified professional and rules on professional ethics;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that robots as mechanical objects should fall under the definition of machinery set by the directive on machinery (2006/42/EC) and should be designed and assembled in compliance with the standards and safety measures provided therein, as well as with the provisions on placing the machinery on the market and putting it into service;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that Member States and the Commission should promote AI technologies that work for people; calls on the Member States, in close cooperation with the Commission, to develop AI applications aimed at automating and facilitating e-government services, for example in the area of tax administration; underlines that explainable, unbiased and transparent algorithms are important to ensure that businesses and consumers benefit from better, non- discriminatory and reliable public services at a lower cost.
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that Member States and the Commission should promote AI technologies that work for people; calls on the Member States, in close cooperation with the Commission, to develop AI applications aimed at automating and facilitating e-government services, for example in the area of tax administration; underlines that explainable algorithms are important to ensure that businesses and consumers benefit from better, accessible, fast, non- discriminatory and reliable public services at a lower cost.
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recalls that the Parliament foresaw in its resolution of 16 February 2017 on Civil Law Rules on Robotics the possibility that artificial intelligence may become an independent subject of civil law, which would have significant implications for the functioning of the single market; urges therefore the Commission to monitor and analyse developments of this matter in both international law and the domestic laws of the Member States.