War Algorithms in Modern Deliberative Democracies: Parliamentary Technology Assessment as a Public Conscience Discovery Tool?
| Autor(a) principal: | |
|---|---|
| Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
| Outros Autores: | |
| Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
| Idioma: | eng |
| Título da fonte: | Teoria Jurídica Contemporânea |
| Texto Completo: | https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/rjur/article/view/50767 |
Resumo: | This paper is focused on the intersection of public international law and parliamentary assessment of technologies in the context of discussions on the lethal applications of artificial intelligence. The authors discuss the ‘public conscience requirements’ of the Martens clause as an opportunity to increase the legitimacy of international law by including qualified public opinion in the international law-making process. This is particularly important in the case of controversial technologies such as lethal autonomous weapons systems, which have a fundamental impact on warfare and the application of which comes with both unprecedented benefits and as well as risks for humankind. The authors advocate the actual use of the Parliamentary Technology Assessment (PTA) mechanism as a method based on democratic deliberation and participation, which – especially in times of disinformation and fake news – can provide a reliable source of information and sights for both policy makers as well as the general public. PTA can be also seen as an institutionalised channel allowing civil society to exercise oversight over disruptive military technologies. |
| id |
UFRJ-22_c9902dfe2b3b7f5a1bebac0386d4da1a |
|---|---|
| oai_identifier_str |
oai:www.revistas.ufrj.br:article/50767 |
| network_acronym_str |
UFRJ-22 |
| network_name_str |
Teoria Jurídica Contemporânea |
| repository_id_str |
|
| spelling |
War Algorithms in Modern Deliberative Democracies: Parliamentary Technology Assessment as a Public Conscience Discovery Tool?international law; public law; political sciencelethal autonomous weapon systems; public conscience; qualified public opinion; parliamentary technology assessmentThis paper is focused on the intersection of public international law and parliamentary assessment of technologies in the context of discussions on the lethal applications of artificial intelligence. The authors discuss the ‘public conscience requirements’ of the Martens clause as an opportunity to increase the legitimacy of international law by including qualified public opinion in the international law-making process. This is particularly important in the case of controversial technologies such as lethal autonomous weapons systems, which have a fundamental impact on warfare and the application of which comes with both unprecedented benefits and as well as risks for humankind. The authors advocate the actual use of the Parliamentary Technology Assessment (PTA) mechanism as a method based on democratic deliberation and participation, which – especially in times of disinformation and fake news – can provide a reliable source of information and sights for both policy makers as well as the general public. PTA can be also seen as an institutionalised channel allowing civil society to exercise oversight over disruptive military technologies.Programa de Posgrado en Derecho de la Universidad Federal de Rio de JaneiroNational Science Center (Poland)Kowalczewska, KajaKijewska, Barbara2022-06-14info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionAvaliado pelos paresapplication/pdfhttps://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/rjur/article/view/5076710.21875/tjc.v7i0.50767Teoria Jurídica Contemporânea; v. 7 (2022)Teoria Jurídica Contemporânea; v. 7 (2022)Teoria Jurídica Contemporânea; v. 7 (2022)2526-046410.21875/tjc.v7i0reponame:Teoria Jurídica Contemporâneainstname:Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ)instacron:UFRJenghttps://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/rjur/article/view/50767/28924https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/rjur/article/downloadSuppFile/50767/17980/*ref*/Altmann Jürgen and Sauer Frank, ‘Autonomous Weapon Systems and Strategic Stability’ (2017) 59 Weaponry and Strategy Arkin Ronald, Governing Lethal Behavior in Autonomous Robots (CRC Press 2009) Asaro Peter, ‘Jus Nascendi, Robotic Weapons and the Martens Clause’ in Calo Ryan, Michael Froomkin and Ian Kerr (eds), Robot Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2016) Asaro Peter, ‘On Banning Autonomous Weapon Systems: Human Rights, Automation, and the Dehumanization of Lethal Decision-Making’ (2013) 94 International Review of the Red Cross 687 Bechtold Ulrike, Fuchs Daniela and Gudowsky Noklas, ‘Imagining Socio-Technical Futures–Challenges and Opportunities for Technology Assessment’ (2017) 4 Journal of Responsible Innovation Boldyreva Elena L. and others, ‘Cambridge Analytica: Ethics and Online Manipulation with Decision-Making Process’, 18th PCSF 2018 Professional Culture of the Specialist of the Future (2018) Boothby William, Weapons Law and The Law of Armed Conflict (2nd ed., Oxford University Press 2016) Brookings, ‘How Soft Law Is Used in AI Governance’ (2021) Bütschi Danielle and Almeida Mara, ‘Technology Assessment for Parliaments - Towards Reflexive Governance of Innovation’, Policy-Oriented Technology Assessment Across Europe: Expanding Capacities (Palgrave M, 2016) Cai Congyan, ‘New Great Powers and International Law in the 21st Century’ (2013) 24 European Journal of International Law Carty Anthony, ‘Critical International Law: Recent Trends in the Theory of International Law’ (1991) 2 European Journal of International Law Cassauwers Tom, ‘Opening the “Black Box” of Artificial Intelligence’ (European Commission, 2020) Cassese Antonio, ‘The Martens Clause: Half a Loaf or Simply Pie in the Sky?’ (2000) 11 European Journal of International Law CCW, ‘Group of Governmental Experts on Emerging Technologies in the Area of Lethal Autonomous Weapons System. Chairperson’s Summary’ (2020) CCW, ‘Humanitarian Benefits of Emerging Technologies in the Area of Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems’ (2018) CCW, ‘Report of the 2018 Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems’ (2018) CCW, The Australian Article 36 Review Process 2018 Charnovitz Steve, ‘Nongovernmental Organizations and International Law’ (2006) 100 American Journal of International Law Chertoff Philip, ‘Perils of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems Proliferation : Preventing Non-State Acquisition’ [2018] Geneva Centre for Security Policy CNBC, ‘Putin: Leader in Artificial Intelligence Will Rule World’ (2017) Coates Joseph F, ‘Technology Assessment: Here Today, Gone Tomorrow’ (2016) 113 Technological Forecasting & Social Change Crootof Rebecca, ‘War Torts: Accountability for Autonomous Weapons’ (2016) 164 University of Pennsylvania Law Review Cruz-Castro Laura and Sanz-Menéndez Luis, ‘Politics and Institutions: European Parliamentary Technology Assessment’ (2005) 72 Technological Forecasting and Social Change Dacombe Rod, ‘Systematic Reviews in Political Science: What Can the Approach Contribute to Political Research?’ (2018) 16 Political Studies Review de Oliviera Biazatti Bruno and Carvalho de Mesquita Vasconcellos Gustavo, ‘The Martens Clause: A Study of Its Function and Meaning’ (2015) 16 Revista Eletrônica de Direito Internacional Delvenne Pierre and Rosskamp Benedikt, ‘Cosmopolitan Technology Assessment ? Lessons Learned from Attempts to Address the Deficit of Technology Assessment in Europe Attempts to Address the Deficit of Technology Assessment in Europe’ (2021) 8 Journal of Responsible Innovation Delvenne Pierre, Fallon Catherine and Brunet Sébastien, ‘Parliamentary Technology Assessment Institutions as Indications of Reflexive Modernization’ (2011) 33 Technology in Society Der Vorsitzende, Robotische Waffensysteme and Technologische Fortschritte, ‘Öffentliches Fachgespräch"Autonome Waffensysteme"’ Deutschen Bundestag, ‘Autonome Waffensysteme: Wenn Maschinen Über Leben Und Tod Entscheiden’ (2020) Dilmegani Cem, ‘When Will Singularity Happen? 995 Experts’ Opinions on AGI’ (AI Multiple, 2017) European Commission, ‘A Definition of AI: Main Capabilities and Disciplines’ (AI HLEG, 2019) Evans Tyler D., ‘At War With The Robots: Autonomous Weapon Systems and the Martens Clause’ (2013) 41 Hofstra Law Review Fleck Dieter, ‘The Martens Clause and Environmental Protection in Relation to Armed Conflicts’ (2020) 10 Goettingen Journal of International Law Ford Christopher A., ‘Al, Human-Machine Interaction, and Autonomous Weapons: Thinking Carefully About Taking “Killer Robots” Seriously’ (2020) 11 Arms Control and International Security Papers Gómez de Ágreda Ángel, ‘Ethics of Autonomous Weapons Systems and Its Applicability to Any AI Systems’ (2020). Grünwald Reinhard and Kehl Christoph, ‘Autonome Waffensysteme’ [2020] Künstliche Intelligenz Gruszczyński Łukasz, ‘Tackling the COVID-19 Pandemic through Governmental Regulations: The Experience of Poland’ (2021) 7 Journal of Health Inequalities Horowitz Michael C., ‘Public Opinion and the Politics of the Killer Robots Debate’ (2016) 3 Research and Politics Human Rights Committee, ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions’ (2013) Human Rights Watch, ‘Heed the Call: A Moral and Legal Imperative to Ban Killer Robots’ (2018) Human Rights Watch, ‘Killer Robots: Survey Shows Opposition Remains Strong’ (2021) Human Rights Watch, ‘Mind the Gap. The Lack of Accountability for Killer Robot’ (2015) Human Rights Watch, ‘Poll Shows Strong Opposition to “Killer Robots”’ (2019) ICJ, Corfu Channel (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v. Albania) (1949) ICJ, Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion (1996) ICRC, ‘Ethics and Autonomous Weapon Systems: An Ethical Basis for Human Control?’ (2018) ICRC, ‘ICRC Position on Autonomous Weapon Systems’ (2021) Ikejiaku Brian V., ‘International Law Is Western Made Global Law: The Perception of Third-World Category’ (2014) 6 African Journal of Legal Studies IPSOS, ‘Three in Ten Americans Support Using Autonomous Weapons’ (2017) Jenks Chris, ‘False Rubicons, Moral Panic & Conceptual Cul-de-Sacs: Critiquing & Reframing the Call to Ban Lethal Automatic Weapons’ (2016) 44 Pepperdine Law Review Jensen Eric T., ‘Emerging Technologies and LOAC Signaling’ (2015) 91 International Law Studies Jia Lianrui, ‘What Public and Whose Opinion? A Study of Chinese Online Public Opinion Analysis’ (2019) 4 Communication and the Public Jørgensen Nina H.B., The Responsibility of States for International Crimes (2012) Kałduński Marcin, ‘On the Martens Clause in International Law Today’ in Tadeusz Jasudowicz, Michał Balcerzak and Julia Kapelańska-Pręgowska (eds), Contemporary Problems of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (Dom Organizatora 2009) Kool Linda and others, ‘Urgent Upgrade: Protect Public Values in Our Digitized Society’ (Rethanau Instituut, 2017) Kowalczewska Kaja, Sztuczna inteligencja na wojnie (Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, 2021) KPRM, ‘Grupa Robocza Ds. Sztucznej Inteligencji (GRAI)’ (2020) Kwiecień Roman, Teoria i Filozofia Prawa Międzynarodowego. Problemy wybrane (Difin 2011) Lewis Dustin A., Blum Gabriella and Modirzadeh Naz K., ‘War-Algorithm Accountability’ (Harvard Law School Program on International Law And Armed Conflict, 2016) Lewis Larry, ‘Redefining Human Control: Lessons from the Battlefield for Autonomous Weapons (Center for Autonomy and AI, 2018). Liu Hin Yan, ‘Categorization and Legality of Autonomous and Remote Weapons Systems’ (2013) 94 International Review of the Red Cross Lohmann Sarah, ‘Germany Has a Math Problem, and It’s about to Get Worse’ (2021) Luceri Luca and others, ‘Evolution of Bot and Human Behavior during Elections’ (2019) 24 First Monday Maas Matthijs M., ‘International Law Does Not Compute: Artificial Intelligence and the Development, Displacement or Destruction of the Global Legal Order’ (2019) 20 Melbourne Journal of International Law Marchant Gary E. and others, ‘International Governance of Autonomous Military Robots’ (2011) 12 Columbia Science and Technology Law Review 272’ (2011) 12 Columbia Science and Technology Law Review Mayer C and others, Policy Guidance ‘Autonomy in Defence Systems’”, Focus Area: Role of Autonomous Systems in Gaining Operational Access (2014) McFarland Tim and McCormack Tim, ‘Mind the Gap: Can Developers of Autonomous Weapons Systems Be Liable for War Crimes?’ (2014) 90 International Law Studies Mégret Frédéric, ‘The Humanitarian Problem with Drones’ (2013) 5 Utah Law Review Meron Theodor, ‘The Martens Clause, Principles of Humanity, and Dictates of Public Conscience’ (2000) 94 American Journal of International Law Michalski Krzysztof, ‘Przegląd Metod i Procedur Wykorzystywanych w Ocenie Technologii Wstęp’ (2015) 3 Studia BAS NATO, ‘NATO Advisory Group on Emerging and Disruptive Technologies’ (2020) Neudert Lisa M. and Marchal Nahema, Polarisation and the Use of Technology in Political Campaigns and Communication (European Parliament European Parliamentary Research Service Scientific Foresight Unit 2019) NWS, ‘België Eerste Land Ter Wereld Om “Killer Robots” Te Verbieden’ (2018) Peace Palace Library, ‘The Martens Clause: A New Research Guide’ (2017) POST, ‘Automation in Military Operations’ (2015) Press Daryl G., Sagan Scott D. and Valentino Benjamin A., ‘Atomic Aversion: Experimental Evidence on Taboos, Traditions, and the Non-Use of Nuclear Weapons’ (2013) 107 American Political Science Review Protocol Additional, ‘Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I)’ 17512 UNTC 1125 Ratto Mat and Boler Megan, DIY Citizenship: Critical Making and Social Media Edited (2014) Reding D. and Eaton J., ‘Science and Technology Trends 2020-2040’ (NATO Science and Technology Organization, 2020). Roff Heather M., ‘What Do People Around the World Think About Killer Robots?’ (2017) Rubner Lorentz, ‘Diplomats vs. Robots: Where Does Germany Stand on Autonomous Weapons?’ (Völkerrechtsblog, 2020) Sander Barrie, ‘Democratic Disruption in the Age of Social Media: Between Marketized and Structural Conceptions of Human Rights Law’ (2021) 32 European Journal of International Law Sauer Frank, ‘Stepping Back from the Brink: Why Multilateral Regulation of Autonomy in Weapons Systems Is Difficult, yet Imperative and Feasible’(2020) 102(93) International Review of the Red Cross: Digital technologies and war Scharre Paul, ‘Autonomous Weapons and Operational. Risk Ethical Autonomy Project’ (2016) Schmitt Michael N. and Thurner Jeffrey S., ‘“Out of the Loop”: Autonomous Weapon Systems and the Law of Armed Conflict’ [2013] 4 Harvard National Security Journal Schroeder Ralph, Social Theory after the Internet. Media, Technology and Globalization (2018) Singer Peter W., ‘Robots at War: The New Battlefield’ in Hew Strachan and Sibylle Scheipers (eds), The Changing Character of War (Oxford University Press 2011) Sparrow Robert, ‘Ethics as a Source of Law: The Martens Clause and Autonomous Weapons’ (Humanitarian Law and Policy, 2017) Sperduti Giuseppe, Lezioni Di Diritto Internazionale (A Giuffrè, 1958) Stop Killer Robots, ‘Stop Killer Robots’ (2021) TAB, ‘Projects Overview’ (2022) Take Action, ‘Take Action’ (2021) Tran Thien A. and Daim Tugrul, ‘A Taxonomic Review of Methods and Tools Applied in Technology Assessment’ (2008) 75 Technological Forecasting and Social Change Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal (Internationale Veiligheidsstrategie 2019) UN, ‘Background on LAWS in the CCW’ (Office for Disarmament Affairs, 2021) United Nations, ‘UN75: Social Contract 2020 - Toward Safety, Security, & Sustainability for AI World’ (2020) UNSG, ‘Secretary-General Calls Partnership of NGOs, Private Sector, International Organizations and Governments Powerful Partnership for Future’ (1999) Van Est Rinie, ‘Thinking Parliamentary Technology Assessment Politically: Exploring the Link between Democratic Policy Making and Parliamentary TA’ (2019) 139 Technological Forecasting and Social Change Van Kersbergen Kees and Van Waarden Frans, ‘“Governance” as a Bridge between Disciplines: Cross-Disciplinary Inspiration Regarding Shifts in Governance and Problems of Governability, Accountability and Legitimacy’ (2004) 43 European Journal of Political Research Verdiesen Ilse, Santoni De Sio Filippo and Dignum Virginia, ‘Moral Values Related to Autonomous Weapon Systems: An Empirical Survey That Reveals Common Ground for the Ethical Debate’ (2019) 38 IEEE Technology and Society Magazine Veuthey Michel, ‘Public Conscience in International Humanitarian Action’ in Fischer Horst and others (eds), Crisis Management and Humanitarian Protection: In Honour of Dieter Fleck (2004) Watts Sean, ‘Regulation-Tolerant Weapons, Regulation-Resistant Weapons and the Law of War’ (2015) 91 International Law Studies Wouters Jan, De Meester Bart and Ryngaert Cedric, ‘Democracy and International Law’ (2003) 34 Netherlands Yearbook of International LawDireitos autorais 2022 Kaja Kowalczewska, Barbara Kijewskainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-06-14T17:47:56Zoai:www.revistas.ufrj.br:article/50767Revistahttps://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/rjur/indexPUBhttps://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/rjur/oaitjc.ppgd.ufrj@gmail.com || rodrigocarelli@direito.ufrj.br || maysasdeandrade@gmail.com2526-04642526-0464opendoar:2022-06-14T17:47:56Teoria Jurídica Contemporânea - Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ)false |
| dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
War Algorithms in Modern Deliberative Democracies: Parliamentary Technology Assessment as a Public Conscience Discovery Tool? |
| title |
War Algorithms in Modern Deliberative Democracies: Parliamentary Technology Assessment as a Public Conscience Discovery Tool? |
| spellingShingle |
War Algorithms in Modern Deliberative Democracies: Parliamentary Technology Assessment as a Public Conscience Discovery Tool? Kowalczewska, Kaja international law; public law; political science lethal autonomous weapon systems; public conscience; qualified public opinion; parliamentary technology assessment |
| title_short |
War Algorithms in Modern Deliberative Democracies: Parliamentary Technology Assessment as a Public Conscience Discovery Tool? |
| title_full |
War Algorithms in Modern Deliberative Democracies: Parliamentary Technology Assessment as a Public Conscience Discovery Tool? |
| title_fullStr |
War Algorithms in Modern Deliberative Democracies: Parliamentary Technology Assessment as a Public Conscience Discovery Tool? |
| title_full_unstemmed |
War Algorithms in Modern Deliberative Democracies: Parliamentary Technology Assessment as a Public Conscience Discovery Tool? |
| title_sort |
War Algorithms in Modern Deliberative Democracies: Parliamentary Technology Assessment as a Public Conscience Discovery Tool? |
| author |
Kowalczewska, Kaja |
| author_facet |
Kowalczewska, Kaja Kijewska, Barbara |
| author_role |
author |
| author2 |
Kijewska, Barbara |
| author2_role |
author |
| dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
National Science Center (Poland) |
| dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Kowalczewska, Kaja Kijewska, Barbara |
| dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
|
| dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
international law; public law; political science lethal autonomous weapon systems; public conscience; qualified public opinion; parliamentary technology assessment |
| topic |
international law; public law; political science lethal autonomous weapon systems; public conscience; qualified public opinion; parliamentary technology assessment |
| description |
This paper is focused on the intersection of public international law and parliamentary assessment of technologies in the context of discussions on the lethal applications of artificial intelligence. The authors discuss the ‘public conscience requirements’ of the Martens clause as an opportunity to increase the legitimacy of international law by including qualified public opinion in the international law-making process. This is particularly important in the case of controversial technologies such as lethal autonomous weapons systems, which have a fundamental impact on warfare and the application of which comes with both unprecedented benefits and as well as risks for humankind. The authors advocate the actual use of the Parliamentary Technology Assessment (PTA) mechanism as a method based on democratic deliberation and participation, which – especially in times of disinformation and fake news – can provide a reliable source of information and sights for both policy makers as well as the general public. PTA can be also seen as an institutionalised channel allowing civil society to exercise oversight over disruptive military technologies. |
| publishDate |
2022 |
| dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-06-14 |
| dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Avaliado pelos pares |
| format |
article |
| status_str |
publishedVersion |
| dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/rjur/article/view/50767 10.21875/tjc.v7i0.50767 |
| url |
https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/rjur/article/view/50767 |
| identifier_str_mv |
10.21875/tjc.v7i0.50767 |
| dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
| language |
eng |
| dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/rjur/article/view/50767/28924 https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/rjur/article/downloadSuppFile/50767/17980 /*ref*/Altmann Jürgen and Sauer Frank, ‘Autonomous Weapon Systems and Strategic Stability’ (2017) 59 Weaponry and Strategy Arkin Ronald, Governing Lethal Behavior in Autonomous Robots (CRC Press 2009) Asaro Peter, ‘Jus Nascendi, Robotic Weapons and the Martens Clause’ in Calo Ryan, Michael Froomkin and Ian Kerr (eds), Robot Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2016) Asaro Peter, ‘On Banning Autonomous Weapon Systems: Human Rights, Automation, and the Dehumanization of Lethal Decision-Making’ (2013) 94 International Review of the Red Cross 687 Bechtold Ulrike, Fuchs Daniela and Gudowsky Noklas, ‘Imagining Socio-Technical Futures–Challenges and Opportunities for Technology Assessment’ (2017) 4 Journal of Responsible Innovation Boldyreva Elena L. and others, ‘Cambridge Analytica: Ethics and Online Manipulation with Decision-Making Process’, 18th PCSF 2018 Professional Culture of the Specialist of the Future (2018) Boothby William, Weapons Law and The Law of Armed Conflict (2nd ed., Oxford University Press 2016) Brookings, ‘How Soft Law Is Used in AI Governance’ (2021) Bütschi Danielle and Almeida Mara, ‘Technology Assessment for Parliaments - Towards Reflexive Governance of Innovation’, Policy-Oriented Technology Assessment Across Europe: Expanding Capacities (Palgrave M, 2016) Cai Congyan, ‘New Great Powers and International Law in the 21st Century’ (2013) 24 European Journal of International Law Carty Anthony, ‘Critical International Law: Recent Trends in the Theory of International Law’ (1991) 2 European Journal of International Law Cassauwers Tom, ‘Opening the “Black Box” of Artificial Intelligence’ (European Commission, 2020) Cassese Antonio, ‘The Martens Clause: Half a Loaf or Simply Pie in the Sky?’ (2000) 11 European Journal of International Law CCW, ‘Group of Governmental Experts on Emerging Technologies in the Area of Lethal Autonomous Weapons System. Chairperson’s Summary’ (2020) CCW, ‘Humanitarian Benefits of Emerging Technologies in the Area of Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems’ (2018) CCW, ‘Report of the 2018 Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems’ (2018) CCW, The Australian Article 36 Review Process 2018 Charnovitz Steve, ‘Nongovernmental Organizations and International Law’ (2006) 100 American Journal of International Law Chertoff Philip, ‘Perils of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems Proliferation : Preventing Non-State Acquisition’ [2018] Geneva Centre for Security Policy CNBC, ‘Putin: Leader in Artificial Intelligence Will Rule World’ (2017) Coates Joseph F, ‘Technology Assessment: Here Today, Gone Tomorrow’ (2016) 113 Technological Forecasting & Social Change Crootof Rebecca, ‘War Torts: Accountability for Autonomous Weapons’ (2016) 164 University of Pennsylvania Law Review Cruz-Castro Laura and Sanz-Menéndez Luis, ‘Politics and Institutions: European Parliamentary Technology Assessment’ (2005) 72 Technological Forecasting and Social Change Dacombe Rod, ‘Systematic Reviews in Political Science: What Can the Approach Contribute to Political Research?’ (2018) 16 Political Studies Review de Oliviera Biazatti Bruno and Carvalho de Mesquita Vasconcellos Gustavo, ‘The Martens Clause: A Study of Its Function and Meaning’ (2015) 16 Revista Eletrônica de Direito Internacional Delvenne Pierre and Rosskamp Benedikt, ‘Cosmopolitan Technology Assessment ? Lessons Learned from Attempts to Address the Deficit of Technology Assessment in Europe Attempts to Address the Deficit of Technology Assessment in Europe’ (2021) 8 Journal of Responsible Innovation Delvenne Pierre, Fallon Catherine and Brunet Sébastien, ‘Parliamentary Technology Assessment Institutions as Indications of Reflexive Modernization’ (2011) 33 Technology in Society Der Vorsitzende, Robotische Waffensysteme and Technologische Fortschritte, ‘Öffentliches Fachgespräch"Autonome Waffensysteme"’ Deutschen Bundestag, ‘Autonome Waffensysteme: Wenn Maschinen Über Leben Und Tod Entscheiden’ (2020) Dilmegani Cem, ‘When Will Singularity Happen? 995 Experts’ Opinions on AGI’ (AI Multiple, 2017) European Commission, ‘A Definition of AI: Main Capabilities and Disciplines’ (AI HLEG, 2019) Evans Tyler D., ‘At War With The Robots: Autonomous Weapon Systems and the Martens Clause’ (2013) 41 Hofstra Law Review Fleck Dieter, ‘The Martens Clause and Environmental Protection in Relation to Armed Conflicts’ (2020) 10 Goettingen Journal of International Law Ford Christopher A., ‘Al, Human-Machine Interaction, and Autonomous Weapons: Thinking Carefully About Taking “Killer Robots” Seriously’ (2020) 11 Arms Control and International Security Papers Gómez de Ágreda Ángel, ‘Ethics of Autonomous Weapons Systems and Its Applicability to Any AI Systems’ (2020). Grünwald Reinhard and Kehl Christoph, ‘Autonome Waffensysteme’ [2020] Künstliche Intelligenz Gruszczyński Łukasz, ‘Tackling the COVID-19 Pandemic through Governmental Regulations: The Experience of Poland’ (2021) 7 Journal of Health Inequalities Horowitz Michael C., ‘Public Opinion and the Politics of the Killer Robots Debate’ (2016) 3 Research and Politics Human Rights Committee, ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions’ (2013) Human Rights Watch, ‘Heed the Call: A Moral and Legal Imperative to Ban Killer Robots’ (2018) Human Rights Watch, ‘Killer Robots: Survey Shows Opposition Remains Strong’ (2021) Human Rights Watch, ‘Mind the Gap. The Lack of Accountability for Killer Robot’ (2015) Human Rights Watch, ‘Poll Shows Strong Opposition to “Killer Robots”’ (2019) ICJ, Corfu Channel (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v. Albania) (1949) ICJ, Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion (1996) ICRC, ‘Ethics and Autonomous Weapon Systems: An Ethical Basis for Human Control?’ (2018) ICRC, ‘ICRC Position on Autonomous Weapon Systems’ (2021) Ikejiaku Brian V., ‘International Law Is Western Made Global Law: The Perception of Third-World Category’ (2014) 6 African Journal of Legal Studies IPSOS, ‘Three in Ten Americans Support Using Autonomous Weapons’ (2017) Jenks Chris, ‘False Rubicons, Moral Panic & Conceptual Cul-de-Sacs: Critiquing & Reframing the Call to Ban Lethal Automatic Weapons’ (2016) 44 Pepperdine Law Review Jensen Eric T., ‘Emerging Technologies and LOAC Signaling’ (2015) 91 International Law Studies Jia Lianrui, ‘What Public and Whose Opinion? A Study of Chinese Online Public Opinion Analysis’ (2019) 4 Communication and the Public Jørgensen Nina H.B., The Responsibility of States for International Crimes (2012) Kałduński Marcin, ‘On the Martens Clause in International Law Today’ in Tadeusz Jasudowicz, Michał Balcerzak and Julia Kapelańska-Pręgowska (eds), Contemporary Problems of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (Dom Organizatora 2009) Kool Linda and others, ‘Urgent Upgrade: Protect Public Values in Our Digitized Society’ (Rethanau Instituut, 2017) Kowalczewska Kaja, Sztuczna inteligencja na wojnie (Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, 2021) KPRM, ‘Grupa Robocza Ds. Sztucznej Inteligencji (GRAI)’ (2020) Kwiecień Roman, Teoria i Filozofia Prawa Międzynarodowego. Problemy wybrane (Difin 2011) Lewis Dustin A., Blum Gabriella and Modirzadeh Naz K., ‘War-Algorithm Accountability’ (Harvard Law School Program on International Law And Armed Conflict, 2016) Lewis Larry, ‘Redefining Human Control: Lessons from the Battlefield for Autonomous Weapons (Center for Autonomy and AI, 2018). Liu Hin Yan, ‘Categorization and Legality of Autonomous and Remote Weapons Systems’ (2013) 94 International Review of the Red Cross Lohmann Sarah, ‘Germany Has a Math Problem, and It’s about to Get Worse’ (2021) Luceri Luca and others, ‘Evolution of Bot and Human Behavior during Elections’ (2019) 24 First Monday Maas Matthijs M., ‘International Law Does Not Compute: Artificial Intelligence and the Development, Displacement or Destruction of the Global Legal Order’ (2019) 20 Melbourne Journal of International Law Marchant Gary E. and others, ‘International Governance of Autonomous Military Robots’ (2011) 12 Columbia Science and Technology Law Review 272’ (2011) 12 Columbia Science and Technology Law Review Mayer C and others, Policy Guidance ‘Autonomy in Defence Systems’”, Focus Area: Role of Autonomous Systems in Gaining Operational Access (2014) McFarland Tim and McCormack Tim, ‘Mind the Gap: Can Developers of Autonomous Weapons Systems Be Liable for War Crimes?’ (2014) 90 International Law Studies Mégret Frédéric, ‘The Humanitarian Problem with Drones’ (2013) 5 Utah Law Review Meron Theodor, ‘The Martens Clause, Principles of Humanity, and Dictates of Public Conscience’ (2000) 94 American Journal of International Law Michalski Krzysztof, ‘Przegląd Metod i Procedur Wykorzystywanych w Ocenie Technologii Wstęp’ (2015) 3 Studia BAS NATO, ‘NATO Advisory Group on Emerging and Disruptive Technologies’ (2020) Neudert Lisa M. and Marchal Nahema, Polarisation and the Use of Technology in Political Campaigns and Communication (European Parliament European Parliamentary Research Service Scientific Foresight Unit 2019) NWS, ‘België Eerste Land Ter Wereld Om “Killer Robots” Te Verbieden’ (2018) Peace Palace Library, ‘The Martens Clause: A New Research Guide’ (2017) POST, ‘Automation in Military Operations’ (2015) Press Daryl G., Sagan Scott D. and Valentino Benjamin A., ‘Atomic Aversion: Experimental Evidence on Taboos, Traditions, and the Non-Use of Nuclear Weapons’ (2013) 107 American Political Science Review Protocol Additional, ‘Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I)’ 17512 UNTC 1125 Ratto Mat and Boler Megan, DIY Citizenship: Critical Making and Social Media Edited (2014) Reding D. and Eaton J., ‘Science and Technology Trends 2020-2040’ (NATO Science and Technology Organization, 2020). Roff Heather M., ‘What Do People Around the World Think About Killer Robots?’ (2017) Rubner Lorentz, ‘Diplomats vs. Robots: Where Does Germany Stand on Autonomous Weapons?’ (Völkerrechtsblog, 2020) Sander Barrie, ‘Democratic Disruption in the Age of Social Media: Between Marketized and Structural Conceptions of Human Rights Law’ (2021) 32 European Journal of International Law Sauer Frank, ‘Stepping Back from the Brink: Why Multilateral Regulation of Autonomy in Weapons Systems Is Difficult, yet Imperative and Feasible’(2020) 102(93) International Review of the Red Cross: Digital technologies and war Scharre Paul, ‘Autonomous Weapons and Operational. Risk Ethical Autonomy Project’ (2016) Schmitt Michael N. and Thurner Jeffrey S., ‘“Out of the Loop”: Autonomous Weapon Systems and the Law of Armed Conflict’ [2013] 4 Harvard National Security Journal Schroeder Ralph, Social Theory after the Internet. Media, Technology and Globalization (2018) Singer Peter W., ‘Robots at War: The New Battlefield’ in Hew Strachan and Sibylle Scheipers (eds), The Changing Character of War (Oxford University Press 2011) Sparrow Robert, ‘Ethics as a Source of Law: The Martens Clause and Autonomous Weapons’ (Humanitarian Law and Policy, 2017) Sperduti Giuseppe, Lezioni Di Diritto Internazionale (A Giuffrè, 1958) Stop Killer Robots, ‘Stop Killer Robots’ (2021) TAB, ‘Projects Overview’ (2022) Take Action, ‘Take Action’ (2021) Tran Thien A. and Daim Tugrul, ‘A Taxonomic Review of Methods and Tools Applied in Technology Assessment’ (2008) 75 Technological Forecasting and Social Change Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal (Internationale Veiligheidsstrategie 2019) UN, ‘Background on LAWS in the CCW’ (Office for Disarmament Affairs, 2021) United Nations, ‘UN75: Social Contract 2020 - Toward Safety, Security, & Sustainability for AI World’ (2020) UNSG, ‘Secretary-General Calls Partnership of NGOs, Private Sector, International Organizations and Governments Powerful Partnership for Future’ (1999) Van Est Rinie, ‘Thinking Parliamentary Technology Assessment Politically: Exploring the Link between Democratic Policy Making and Parliamentary TA’ (2019) 139 Technological Forecasting and Social Change Van Kersbergen Kees and Van Waarden Frans, ‘“Governance” as a Bridge between Disciplines: Cross-Disciplinary Inspiration Regarding Shifts in Governance and Problems of Governability, Accountability and Legitimacy’ (2004) 43 European Journal of Political Research Verdiesen Ilse, Santoni De Sio Filippo and Dignum Virginia, ‘Moral Values Related to Autonomous Weapon Systems: An Empirical Survey That Reveals Common Ground for the Ethical Debate’ (2019) 38 IEEE Technology and Society Magazine Veuthey Michel, ‘Public Conscience in International Humanitarian Action’ in Fischer Horst and others (eds), Crisis Management and Humanitarian Protection: In Honour of Dieter Fleck (2004) Watts Sean, ‘Regulation-Tolerant Weapons, Regulation-Resistant Weapons and the Law of War’ (2015) 91 International Law Studies Wouters Jan, De Meester Bart and Ryngaert Cedric, ‘Democracy and International Law’ (2003) 34 Netherlands Yearbook of International Law |
| dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Direitos autorais 2022 Kaja Kowalczewska, Barbara Kijewska info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| rights_invalid_str_mv |
Direitos autorais 2022 Kaja Kowalczewska, Barbara Kijewska |
| eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
| dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
| dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Programa de Posgrado en Derecho de la Universidad Federal de Rio de Janeiro |
| publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Programa de Posgrado en Derecho de la Universidad Federal de Rio de Janeiro |
| dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Teoria Jurídica Contemporânea; v. 7 (2022) Teoria Jurídica Contemporânea; v. 7 (2022) Teoria Jurídica Contemporânea; v. 7 (2022) 2526-0464 10.21875/tjc.v7i0 reponame:Teoria Jurídica Contemporânea instname:Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ) instacron:UFRJ |
| instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ) |
| instacron_str |
UFRJ |
| institution |
UFRJ |
| reponame_str |
Teoria Jurídica Contemporânea |
| collection |
Teoria Jurídica Contemporânea |
| repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Teoria Jurídica Contemporânea - Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ) |
| repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
tjc.ppgd.ufrj@gmail.com || rodrigocarelli@direito.ufrj.br || maysasdeandrade@gmail.com |
| _version_ |
1797042348607143936 |