Brain-Computer Interfaces, Generative Artificial Intelligence (ChatGPT and Deepfakes) and Criminal Procedure Law: What´s at Stake?
Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, Generative Artificial Intelligence, Brain-Computer Interfaces, Rule of Law, Deepfakes, Corporate Internal Investigations, Criminal Procedure Law, Nemo Tenetur se Ipsum Accusare, ChatGPT, Right to Mental Privacy, Right to Mental Loneliness, Bigoted Algorithms, Flawed Algorithms, Corporate Criminal Liability, Corporate Criminal ComplianceAbstract
The rapidly increasing use of Artificial Intelligence is shaping up to fray the fabric of Rule of Law. In backsliding regimes, a boundless/ubiquitous Artificial Intelligence might usher in, and pave the way to, a steeper/sharper deterioration of Rule of Law. Which should merit nothing but our undeterred/unbridled preoccupation. Whilst there is a burgeoning consensus according to which the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI, for short, which encompasses both Large Language Models and Deepfakes) is bound to put the fundamental tenets of Rule of Law at odds, there is perceived dearth/paucity of legal research regarding the impact of GenAI in the remit of criminal procedure law. Tellingly, and perhaps disturbingly, scant light has been cast upon the clout of Brain-Computer Interfaces in the purview of Criminal Procedure Law, which is swiftly/briskly gathering pace to besmirch/derail a pair of linchpins of the latter: the unwavering principle of presumption of innocence and the unassailable right to mental privacy. Against this stark background, this paper seeks to plug the foregoing gaps while charting the path ahead for a brawny/sturdy criminal procedure law in the age of a Generative Artificial Intelligence, thereby offering a useful template to shrewdly tackle the multifarious issues arising out the interplay between Brain-Computer Interfaces and Criminal Procedure Law.
