Vol. 31 (2024)
Estudios

Military artificial intelligence: criminal liability issues arising from the use of lethal autonomous weapon systems

PDF (Spanish) EPUB (Spanish)
Marcos Antonio Aravena Flores
Universidad Autónoma de Chile

Published 2024-10-21

Keywords

  • autonomous weapons,
  • military technology or warfare technology,
  • accountability

Copyright (c) 2024 Marcos Antonio Aravena Flores

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Aravena Flores, M. A. (2024). Military artificial intelligence: criminal liability issues arising from the use of lethal autonomous weapon systems. Revista De Derecho (Coquimbo. En línea), 31, e6632. https://doi.org/10.22199/

Abstract

Technological advances have led to a risk society, exacerbated by the development of artificial intelligence (AI). Currently, AI generates concern for its potential risk and malicious use, which is evident in the incorporation of AI in the military field, with the development of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS), which correspond to weapons that can operate and attack without human intervention, which leads to the problem of attribution of criminal liability for acts carried out by these autonomous weapons. With respect to this problem, different divergent positions have been identified. However, it is concluded that criminal law can and should address the problems of criminal liability of SAALs because it can be adapted to identify individuals with significant control over these technologies. This allows it to maintain justice and accountability without distorting its guiding principles, which focus on the human actions of those who design, manufacture, and operate these technologies. Moreover, criminal law can evolve to face new risks without losing its essence of protecting legal goods and human dignity in the modern conflicts of war.

PDF (Spanish) EPUB (Spanish)

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Abbott, R. y Sarch, A. (2019). Punishing Artificial Intelligence: Legal Fiction or Science Fiction. U.C. Davis law review, 53(1), 323-384. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3327485
  2. Aravena Flores, M. A. (2024). Dilemas derivados del uso de sistemas autónomos de armas letales en el derecho internacional humanitario. Justicia (Barranquilla. En línea), 29(45), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.17081/just.29.45.7143
  3. Araya Paz, C. (2020). Desafíos legales de la inteligencia artificial en Chile. Revista chilena de derecho y tecnología, 9(2), 257-290. https://doi.org/10.5354/0719-2584.2020.54489
  4. Arreola García, A. (2022). Armas Autónomas Letales: Medios de Defensa y Ataque. Revista Seguridad y Poder Terrestre,1(2), 187-196. https://doi.org/10.56221/spt.v1i2.17
  5. Beck, U. (1998). La sociedad del riesgo hacia. Hacia una nueva modernidad. Paidos.
  6. Bo, M. (2021). Autonomous Weapons and the Responsibility Gap in light of the Mens Rea of the War Crime of Attacking Civilians in the ICC Statute. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 19(2), 275-299. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqab005
  7. Brundage, M., Avin, S., Clark, J., Toner, H., Eckersley, P., Garfinkel, B., Dafoe, A., Scharre, P., Zeitzoff, T., Filar, B., Anderson, H., Roff, H., Allen, G. C., Steinhardt, J., Flynn, C., Ó hÉigeartaigh, S., Beard, S., Belfield, H., Farquhar, S.,… Amodei, D. (2018). The Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence: Forecasting, Prevention, and Mitigation. University of Oxford. https://dataspace.princeton.edu/handle/88435/dsp01th83m203g
  8. Código Penal. Santiago, Chile, 12 de noviembre de 1874. https://bcn.cl/2f6m7
  9. Comité Internacional de la Cruz Roja. (8-10 de diciembre de 2015). El derecho internacional humanitario y los desafíos de los conflictos armados contemporáneos [Informe]. XXXII Conferencia Internacional de la Cruz Roja y la Media Luna Roja, Ginebra, Suiza. https://bit.ly/3U6BSh2
  10. de la Cuesta Aguado, P. M. (2020). Inteligencia artificial y responsabilidad penal. Revista Penal México, 9(16-17), 51-62. https://bit.ly/4f2D3WX
  11. DOD 3000.09. Autonomy in Weapon sistems., Departament of defense Directive, 25 de enero de 2023 https://bit.ly/4ePETLe
  12. Departament of defense Directive Responsible AI Working Council. (2022). U.S. Departament of defense responsible artificial intelligence strategy and implementation pathway. https://bit.ly/3zVTrJX
  13. Delgado Calderón, I. (01 de junio de 2012). El dilema del derecho penal y las neurociencias: ¿libre albedrío o determinismo?”. Revista Pensamiento Penal, 1-31. https://bit.ly/4f7AXVR
  14. Durán Migliardi, M. (2011). Teorías absolutas de la pena: Origen y fundamentos: Conceptos críticas fundamentales a la teoría de la retribución moral de Inmanuel Kant a propósito del Neo-retribucionismo y del Neoproporcionalismo en el Derecho Penal Actual. Revista de filosofía (Santiago), 67, 123-144. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-43602011000100009
  15. Egeland, K. (2016). Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems under International Humanitarian Law. Nordic Journal of International Law, 85(2), 89–118. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718107-08502001
  16. Ercilla García, J. (2018). Normas de derecho civil y robótica: Robots inteligentes, personalidad jurídica, responsabilidad civil y regulación. Aranzadi.
  17. Gómez de Ágreda, Á. (2020). Usos militares de la inteligencia artificial, la automatización y la robótica (IAA&R). Ministerio de Defensa. https://bit.ly/4dIlnil
  18. Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología, Conocimiento e Innovación de Chile. (2024). Política Nacional de Inteligencia Artificial. Actualización 2024. Gobierno de Chile. https://bit.ly/4h7VvPS
  19. Grossman, N. (2018). Drones and Terrorism: Asymmetric Warfare and the Threat to global Security. Bloomsbury. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350986169
  20. Hallevy, G. (2010). The Criminal Liability of Artificial Intelligence Entities - from Science Fiction to Legal Social Control. Akron Intellectual Property Journal, 4(2), 171-201. https://bit.ly/3Y48GIN
  21. Hellström, T. (2013). On the moral responsibility of military robots. Ethics and Information Technology, 15(2), 99-107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-012-9301-2
  22. Jiménez Díaz, M. M. (2014). Sociedad del riesgo e intervención penal. Revista Electrónica de Ciencia Penal y Criminología, (16), 1-25. https://bit.ly/3BM2bD3
  23. Luzón Peña, D. M. (2012). Libertad, culpabilidad y neurociencias. InDret, (3), 2-59. https://bit.ly/3Y77tQT
  24. López-Casamayor Justicia, A. (2019). Armas letales autónomas a la luz del derecho internacional humanitario: legitimidad y responsabilidad. Cuadernos de estratégia, (201), 177-213. https://bit.ly/407NN1U
  25. Llobet Rodríguez, J. (2005). Derecho procesal penal. Garantías procesales (Vol. 2). Jurídica Continental.
  26. Matthias, A. (2004). The Responsibility Gap: Ascribing Responsibility for the Actions of Learning Automata. Ethics and information technology, 6, 175-183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-004-3422-1
  27. Mir Puig, S. (2003). Sentido y alcance de la imputación objetiva en el derecho penal. Revista electrónica de ciencia penal y criminología, (5), 1-19. https://bit.ly/3NrNTK9
  28. Miró Llinares, F. (2020). El sistema penal ante la inteligencia artificial: actitudes, usos y retos. En D. S. Dupuy de Repetto, J. G. Corvalán (Dirs) y M. Kiefer (Coord.), Cibercrimen III: inteligencia artificial, automatización, algoritmos y predicciones en el derecho penal y procesal penal (pp. 81-136). Euros.
  29. Morillas Fernández, D. L. (2023). Implicaciones de la inteligencia artificial en el ambito del Derecho Penal. En J. M. Peris Riera y A. Massaro (Coords.), Derecho Penal, Inteligencia artificial y neurociencias (pp. 59-92). Roma Tre-press. https://bit.ly/4f7o6mC
  30. Nalin, A. y Tripodi, P. (2023). Future Warfare and Responsibility Management in the AI-based Military Decision-making Process. Journal of Advanced Military Studies, 14(1), 83-97. https://doi.org/10.21140/mcuj.20231401003
  31. Naquira Riveros, J. (2014). Derecho Penal Chileno. Parte General (Vol. 2). Thomson Reuters.
  32. Novelli, C. (2023). Legal personhood for the integration of AI systems in the social context: a study hypothesis. AI & society, 38(4), 1347–1359. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01384-w
  33. Ohlin, D. J. (2017). Remoteness and Reciprocal Risk. En D. J. Ohlin (Ed.), Research Handbook on Remote Warfare (pp. 15-49). Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784716998.00010
  34. Oimann, A.-K. (2023). The responsibility gap and laws: A critical mapping of the debate. Philosophy & Technology, 36(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-022-00602-7
  35. Osmani, N. (2020). The Complexity of Criminal Liability of AI Systems. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, 14(1), 53-82. https://doi.org/10.5817/MUJLT2020-1-3
  36. Petman, J. M. (2017). Autonomous Weapons Systems and International Humanitarian Law: ‘Out of the Loop’? The Eric Castren Institute of International Law and Human Rights. https://bit.ly/4ePJjli
  37. Posada Maya, R. (2019). La responsabilidad penal de los agentes de inteligencia artificial: Entre la ficción y una realidad que se aproxima. En G. Portilla Contreras, y F. Velásquez Velásquez (Dirs.), Un juez para la democracia: libro homenaje a Perfecto Andrés Ibáñez (pp. 561-581). Dykinson. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv103xbt5.33
  38. Sistemas armamentísticos autónomos. P8_TA(2018)0341, sobre los sistemas armamentísticos autónomos (2018/2752(RSP)). Parlamento Europeo 12 de septiembre de 2018. https://bit.ly/3BUFYT4
  39. Press, M. (2018). Of robots and rules: Autonomous weapon system in the law of armed conflict. Georgetown journal of international law, 48, 1337-1366. https://bit.ly/4895BM8
  40. Rahim Dahiyat, E. A. (2020). Artificial intelligence and law: do we need thoughtful reconsideration? Colorado technology law journal, 18(2), 351-392. https://bit.ly/3zXVygm
  41. Reyes, C. (2021). LAWS: inteligencia artificial al servicio de nuevos formatos bélicos. Boletín informativo (Instituto de Relaciones Internacionales), (42), 12-17. https://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/123752
  42. Salvadori, I. (2021). Agentes artificiales, opacidad tecnológica y distribución de la responsabilidad. Cuadernos de política criminal, (133), 137-174. https://bit.ly/486KES4
  43. Santoni de Sio, F. y Mecacci, G. (2021). Four Responsibility Gaps with Artificial Intelligence: Why They Matter and How to Address Them. Philosophy & technology, 34, 1057-1084. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-021-00450-x
  44. Saria, O. y Celik, S. (2021). Legal evaluation of the attacks caused by artificial intelligence-based lethal weapon systems within the context of Rome statute. Computer Law & Security Review, 42, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2021.105564
  45. Sehrawat, V. (2021). Autonomous Weapon System and Command Responsibility. Florida Journal of International Law, 31(3). https://bit.ly/3NnGs6W
  46. Simmler, M. y Markwalder , N. (2019). Guilty Robots? – Rethinking the Nature of Culpability and Legal Personhood in an Age of Artificial Intelligence. Criminal Law Forum, 30, 1–31. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10609-018-9360-0
  47. Solaiman, S. M. (2017). Legal personhood of robots, corporations, idols and chimpanzees: a quest for legitimacy. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 25(2), 155-179. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-016-9192-3
  48. Stanila, L. (2020). Living in the future: New actors in the field of criminal law-artificial intelligence [Conferencia]. The 7th International Scientific Conference of the Faculty of Law of the University of Latvia, Riga, Letonia. . https://doi.org/10.22364/iscflul.7.2.24
  49. Szpak, A. (2019). Legality of Use and Challenges of New Technologies in Warfare – the Use of Autonomous Weapons in Contemporary or Future Wars.European Review, 28(1), 118-131. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1062798719000310
  50. Taddeo, M. y Blanchard, A. (2022). A Comparative Analysis of the Definitions of Autonomous Weapons Systems. Science and Engineering Ethics, 28(37), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00392-3
  51. Valls Prieto, J. (2022). Sobre la responsabilidad penal por la utilización de sistemas inteligentes. Revista electrónica de ciencia penal y criminología(24-27), 1-35. https://bit.ly/4002wfo
  52. Van Weezel, A. (2023). Curso de Derecho Penal. Parte General. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.3205980