Liabiliti Jenayah Ke Atas Kecerdasan Buatan (Artifical Intelligence) (AI)
Abstract
Abstrak
Kecerdasan buatan atau lebih dikenali sebagai Artificial Intelligence (AI) bukanlah satu perkara yang baharu dalam dunia teknologi. Namun, tidak dinafikan masih terdapat banyak kekurangan dan kajian yang perlu dijalankan untuk mengatasi masalah-masalah yang timbul akibat teknologi ini. Teknologi AI ini pertama kali diperkenalkan pada tahun 1956 oleh seorang profesor daripada University of Standford, Amerika Syarikat. Melaui perkembangan yang pesat, kini teknologi ini mampu membantu manusia dalam menjalani kehidupan seharian. Tidak dinafikan manusia mempunyai kemampuan untuk berfikir dan membuat keputusan, namun terdapat limitasi yang tidak mampu diatasi. Kualiti dan tempoh yang dihasilkan oleh kecerdasan buatan mampu untuk memperoleh dan memproses data dan maklumat dengan lebih pantas dan tepat. Sebagai contoh, ketepatan teknologi ini telah digunakan oleh Mahkamah Majistret Kota Kinabalu apabila sistem berteknologi AI telah digunakan untuk menentukan hukuman ke atas tertuduh yang telah disabitkan dengan kesalahan di bawah seksyen 12(2) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952. Walau bagaimanapun, muncul isu yang besar di sebalik kebaikan yang diberikan di mana teknologi AI ini mampu untuk membuat keputusan tanpa sebarang arahan oleh manusia. Teknologi AI telah meragut nyawa seorang pekerja kilang di Jepun kerana pekerja tersebut dianggap merupakan satu halangan yang perlu dihapuskan. Tanpa arahan diberikan oleh manusia, mesin tersebut telah membuat keputusan sendiri. Hal ini menyerlahkan satu jurang kritikal dalam perundangan jenayah Malaysia yang masih berorientasikan liabiliti terhadap manusia atau entiti korporat, sedangkan AI sebagai entiti bukan manusia dengan kapasiti membuat keputusan autonomi belum diiktiraf dalam mana-mana peruntukan Kanun Keseksaan mahupun akta lain yang berkaitan Oleh itu, artikel ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji tanggungan di bawah undang-undang jenayah yang boleh dikenakan terhadap kesalahan yang dilakukan oleh teknologi AI. Metodologi yang digunakan adalah secara kualitatif melalui kajian literatur Hasil penulisan ini menunjukkan bahawa undang-undang jenayah di Malaysia secara amnya masih belum bersedia untuk meletakkan tanggungjawab ke atas teknologi AI dengan sendirinya. Hal ini kerana Kanun Keseksaan Malaysia masih mendefinisikan pihak yang bersalah sebagai lelaki, perempuan ataupun syarikat. Maka, liabiliti terdekat yang boleh dikenakan adalah terhadap syarikat ataupun badan korporat yang terlibat. Namun, pendekatan ini masih terdapat kelompangan memandangkan elemen mens rea sukar untuk dibuktikan dan elemen ini sangat penting untuk menentukan liabiliti jenayah. Oleh hal yang demikian, satu cadangan am telah dikemukakan agar pihak penggubal undang-undang dapat membuat perbincangan untuk mengkaji dan membuat penambahbaikan terhadap Kanun Keseksaan Malaysia dan undang-undang berkaitan agar tanggungan boleh dikenakan terhadap pihak yang sewajarnya.
Kata kunci: Undang-undang Jenayah Malaysia, liabiliti jenayah, liabiliti jenayah korporat, kecerdasan buatan
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is not a new concept in the world of technology. However, it cannot be denied that there are still various challenges and shortcomings that require further research to address the issues arising from its use. AI technology was first introduced in 1956 by a professor from Stanford University, United States. With rapid technological advancement, AI now has the capability to assist humans in their daily lives more efficiently.Although humans possess the ability to think and make decisions, there are certain limitations that cannot be overcome, particularly in the aspect of processing information quickly and accurately. For instance, the reliability of AI technology has been demonstrated in the Magistrate’s Court of Kota Kinabalu, where an AI-based system was used to assist in determining the sentence of an accused person convicted under Section 12(2) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952.Nevertheless, behind the advantages offered, AI technology also raises serious concerns, particularly when it is able to make decisions autonomously without human intervention. A notable example is an incident in Japan, where a factory worker lost his life after being deemed an obstacle by an AI system, which then proceeded to eliminate him without any instruction from a human operator. This incident raises a significant legal question concerning criminal liability and responsibility when harm is caused by an AI system.Currently, there are no specific provisions in the Malaysian Penal Code or other relevant laws that define the status of AI systems as subjects of criminal liability, thereby creating a legal gap when harm occurs due to AI actions. Therefore, this project paper aims to examine the scope of criminal liability that can be imposed when offences are committed through the use of AI technology.The methodology employed is qualitative, based on doctrinal legal research. The findings indicate that Malaysian criminal law is generally not yet prepared to impose direct responsibility on AI systems. This is because the Penal Code still defines offenders as “male”, “female” or “company”. Thus, the closest form of liability that can currently be applied is through the companies or corporate entities involved. However, this approach remains flawed, especially in proving the element of mens rea (criminal intent), which is crucial in establishing criminal liability.Accordingly, this paper proposes that lawmakers initiate comprehensive discussions to review and reform the Penal Code and other relevant laws, so that legal liability can be appropriately assigned to the responsible parties in cases involving AI systems.
Keywords: Malaysian Criminal Law, Criminal Liability, Corporate Criminal Liability, Artificial Intelligence.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Aggarwal, A. (2021). Analysing the Possibility of Imposing Criminal Liability on AI Systems. The Criminal Law Blog National Law University, Jodhpur. Dipetik pada [23 April 2022] dari https://criminallawstudiesnluj.wordpress.com/2021/01/19/analysing-the-possibility-of-imposing-criminal-liability-on-ai-systems/#:~:text=An%20AI%20entity%20must%20possess,AI%20outweigh%20the%20positive%20consequences.
Ali Atif. (2021). Artificial intelligence and criminal liability: Challenges in articulation of legal aspects for counter-productive actions of machine learning. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Education Studies, 2(3).
Ankit Kumar Padhy & Amit Kumar Padhy. (2019). Criminal liability of the artifical intelligence entitiies. Nirma University Law Journal, 8(2).
Anon. (2018). Corporate criminal liability, AI and DPAs. Dipetik pada [15 Jun 2022] dari https://www.sfo.gov.uk/2018/06/21/corporate-criminal-liability-ai-and-dpas/
Anon. (2020). Criminal Responsibility: Evaluation and Overview. Dipetik pada [10 Jun 2022] dari https://online.maryville.edu/blog/criminal-responsibility/#:~:text=To%20establish%20criminal%20responsibility%20for,do%20so%20purposely%20and%20knowingly.
Anon. (2021). Understanding Artificial Intelligence. Dipetik pada [10 Julai 2022] dari https://blog.vsoftconsulting.com/blog/understanding-artificial-intelligence
Anon. (2022). Artifical intelligence: threats and opportunities. Dipetik pada [10 Februari 2022] dari https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/20200918STO87404/artificial-intelligence-threats-and-opportunities#:~:text=AI%20applications%20that%20are%20in,human%20control%20over%20dangerous%20weapons.
Azrol Abdullah & Nazura Abdul Manap. (2020). Ancaman Tort Kecerdasan Buatan terhadap Manusia: Retorik atau Realiti?. Kanun Jurnal Undang-Undang Malaysia.
Bendett, S. (2020). Russia’s AI Quest for Military Advantage. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs. Retrieved from https://gjia.georgetown.edu/2020/03/13/russias-ai-quest-for-military-advantage/
Browne, R. (2018). Five of the Scariest Predictions About Artifical Intelligence. Dipetik pada [10 Februari 2022] dari https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/01/five-of-the-scariest-predictions-for-ai.html.
Cerka, Paulius, Grigiene, Jurgita, et al. (2017). Is It Possible to Grant Legal Personality to Artifcial Intelligence Software Systems. The International Journal of Technology Law and Practice.
Cerka, Paulius, Grigiene, Jurgita, et al. (2015). Liability for Damages Caused by Artificial Intelligence. Computer Law and Security Review.
Conger, K., Metz, C., & Wakabayashi, D. (2018). A.I. Researchers Are Making More Than $1 Million, Even at a Nonprofit. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/19/technology/artificial-intelligence-salaries-openai.html
Cour de cassation. (2024, May 22). Arrêt n° 23-83.180 – Transfert de la responsabilité pénale en cas de fusion-absorption. Retrieved from https://navacelle.law
Dahshan, Y. (2020). Criminal liability for artifical intelligence crimes. Journal Sharia and Law, 82(2).
Deborah. (n.d.). Criminal liability US. Dipetik pada [10 Jun 2022] dari https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-liability.htm.
Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. (2005). Kamus Dewan (Edisi keempat.). Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Future of Life Institute. (n.d.). Benefits & Risks of Artifical Intelligence. Dipetik pada [20 Februari 2022] dari https://futureoflife.org/background/benefits-risks-of-artificial-intelligence/.
Hallevy, G. (2010). The Criminal Liability of Artifical Intelligence Entities – From Science Fiction to Legal Social Control. Akron Intellectual Property Journal, 4(2).
Hughes, B. & Williamson, R. (2019). How English Law Liability Frameworks May Apply to AI. Dipetik pada [10 Jun 2022] dari https://www.law360.com/articles/1227726/how-english-law-liability-frameworks-may-apply-to-ai
Karlsson, M. (2017). Artifical Intelligence and the External Element of the Crime: An Analysis of the Liability Problem. Orebro Universitet Juridicum.
Kelly, P., Walsh, M., Wyzykiewicz, S. & Young-Alls, S. (2021). Man vs Machine: Legal liability in Artifical Intelligence contracts and the challenges that can arise. Dipetik pada [10 Jun 2022] dari https://www.dlapiper.com/en/romania/insights/publications/2021/10/man-vs-machine-legal-liability-artificial-intelligence-contracts/#:~:text=Instead%2C%20it%20has%20suggested%20a,a%20fault%2Dbased%20assessment7.
Kyodo News. (2023, 24 October). Japan’s FSA orders Big Motor to suspend operations at 34 shops.
Leadley, J., Corby, K., Redmond, J., & Gest, L. (2022). United Kingdom: UK publishes report on the impact of Artifical Intelligence on product safety. Dipetik pada [19 Jun 2022] dari https://www.globalcompliancenews.com/2022/05/31/uk-publishes-report-on-artificial-intelligence230522/
Marr, B. (2020). Is Artifical Intelligence (AI) A Threat to Humans?. Dipetik pada [10 Mac 2022] dari https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2020/03/02/is-artificial-intelligence-ai-a-threat-to-humans/?sh=3f90ff5b205d
McCarthy, J., Minsky, M. L., Rochester, N., & Shannon, C. E. (1955). A proposal for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence. Dartmouth College. https://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html
Mohd Ali, H. (2017). Liabiliti jenayah korporat di Malaysia mengikut perspektif tadbir urus korporat. Jurnal Pengurusan, 51(19), 225–234. https://doi.org/10.17576/pengurusan-2018-51-19
Nagata, K. (2023, 25 July). Big Motor chief to resign in wake of repair fraud scandal. The Japan Times.
Nakazaki, T. (2022). Japan: Artificial Intelligence Comparative Guide. Dipetik pada [10 Jun 2022] dari https://www.mondaq.com/technology/1059766/artificial-intelligence-comparative-guide
Osmani, N. (2020). The complexity of Criminal Liability of AI Systems. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, 14(1).
Shamsuddin Suhor. (2016). Jenayah dan Kanun Keseksaan. Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Thomas, M. (2021). 7 Dangerous Risks of Artifical Intelligence. Dipetik pada [2 Mac 2022] dari https://builtin.com/artificial-intelligence/risks-of-artificial-intelligence.
Turing, A. M. (1950). Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind, 59(236), 433–460. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/LIX.236.433
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
e-ISSN : 2550-1704