The article focuses on big data, algorithmic analytics ("artificial intelligence") and machine learning in criminal justice settings, where mathematics is offering a new language for understanding and responding to crime. It shows how these new tools are blurring contemporary regulatory boundaries, undercutting the safeguards built into regulatory regimes, and abolishing subjectivity and case-specific narratives. After presenting the context for 'algorithmic justice' and existing research, the article shows how specific uses of big data and algorithms change knowledge production regarding crime. It then examines how a specific understanding of crime and acting upon such knowledge violates established criminal procedure rules. It concludes with a discussion of the socio-political context of algorithmic justice.
COBISS.SI-ID: 2154830
In modern society, the pronouncement of a fair criminal sanction to defendants constitutes the ultimate goal that every judge should pursue in criminal proceedings. However, this goal is in fact only an ideal, sicne penal sanctions aften create an unequal position among these defendants. For this reason, the author first introduces how sentencing by the court should be and then attempts to improve and replace this decision-making method by using a computer program, which he developed. The author's thesis is that a computer program could be more just and effective in deciding the criminal sanction for the defendant, which the author presents in the central part of the article by providing principled and concrete reasons for this. The author also examines some of the most well-known court decisions regarding such a decision-making method, and in the penultimate part of the article, presents potential obstacles to the introduction of automated decision-making in the criminal justice process. In conclusion, the author states that the final decision regarding the criminal sanction should still be left to the judge who could use the computer program as a supporting mechanisem. The judge will only be allowed to use the results of this program if all of the criminal guarantees are still provided to the defendant while the judge will verify the outcome of the program and explain the reasoning of the court's decision.
COBISS.SI-ID: 3695082
The article offers the overview of the evolution of the EU action in the field of cybersecurity – from the first attempts to regulate cybercrime to the EU cybersecurity package with a particular emphasis on the strategic priorities and actions set out in the Cybersecurity Strategy of the European Union. The complex institutional structure of the EU, along with the specific status of the Common Foreign and Security Policy within it, and the lack of competence, make it difficult, if not impossible, for the EU to become a coherent actor in the field of cybersecurity.
COBISS.SI-ID: 17186897