Loopholes In EU AI Bans Could Allow Police To Use Controversial Tech

The EU’s new AI Act aims to regulate AI but faces criticism over loopholes, exemptions, and corporate influence.

The European Union’s new AI Act, marks a significant step in regulating artificial intelligence. The world-first legislation bans certain “unacceptable” uses of AI technology, aiming to protect citizens and preserve democratic values.

Among the prohibitions are predictive policing, scraping facial images from the internet for recognition, and using AI to detect emotions from biometric data. However, critics argue that the law contains significant loopholes, particularly when it comes to policing and migration authorities.

While the AI Act bans certain AI uses in principle, it includes exemptions that could allow European police and migration authorities to continue utilizing controversial AI practices, as first reported by Politico.

For instance, real-time facial recognition in public spaces, although largely banned, can still be allowed in exceptional cases, such as serious criminal investigations.

Similarly, the detection of emotions in public settings is prohibited, but exceptions could be made for law enforcement and migration purposes, raising concerns about the potential use of AI to identify deception at borders.

The law’s broad exemptions have raised alarm among digital rights groups. A coalition of 22 organizations warned that the AI Act fails to adequately address concerns regarding law enforcement’s use of the technology.

“The most glaring loophole is the fact that the bans do not apply to law enforcement and migrational authorities,” said Caterina Rodelli, EU policy analyst at Access Now, as reported by Politico.

The EU’s AI Act also bans the use of AI for societal control, a measure introduced to prevent AI from being used to undermine individual freedoms or democracy.

Brando Benifei, an Italian lawmaker involved in drafting the legislation, explained that the goal is to avoid AI technologies being exploited for “societal control” or the “compression of our freedoms,” as reported by Politico.

According to Politico, this stance was influenced by high-profile incidents like the Dutch tax authorities’ controversial use of AI to identify fraud in 2019, which wrongfully accused some 26,000 people of fraud.

In this case, the authorities used an algorithm to spot potential childcare benefits fraud, but the faulty algorithm led to widespread misidentifications and damage to innocent citizens’ lives.

The controversy surrounding this event played a major role in shaping the law’s restrictions on predictive policing and other forms of AI misuse.

Meanwhile, a report by Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) raises concerns about the influence of Big Tech companies on the development of EU AI standards. The report reveals that over half of the members of the Joint Technical Committee on AI (JTC21), responsible for setting AI standards, represent corporate or consultancy interests.

Major companies like Oracle, Microsoft, Amazon, and Google are advocating for lighter regulations that prioritize their commercial interests, rather than protecting fundamental rights or societal welfare.

This corporate influence has raised alarms that the EU’s AI Act could be undermined by industry interests focused on profitability over ethical considerations. Additionally, civil society and academic representatives face financial and logistical challenges in participating in the standard-setting process.

The report highlights the lack of transparency and democratic accountability within standard-setting organizations like CEN and CENELEC, sparking concerns about the fairness and inclusivity of the standards development process.

While the AI Act puts the EU at the forefront of global AI regulation, the ongoing debate over its loopholes suggests that balancing innovation with safeguarding human rights will be a delicate task moving forward.