AI regulation in Ukraine: what has already been done
As part of the three-year Roadmap for the Regulation of Artificial Intelligence in Ukraine, the Ministry of Digital Transformation of Ukraine presented a White Paper that provides specific tools for businesses to use AI.
Sergiy Barbashyn, Chairman of the UNBA NextGen, shared the experience of introducing artificial intelligence in Ukraine and the state's experience in developing future legislation on AI regulation with foreign colleagues during the European Young Bar Association International Weekend 2024, which took place on September 26-29, 2024 in London (UK).
He said that last fall, the Ministry of Digital Transformation of Ukraine presented the Roadmap for Artificial Intelligence Regulation in Ukraine, which should help Ukrainian companies prepare for the adoption of a law similar to the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act and educate citizens on how to protect themselves from AI risks.
In June of this year, the Roadmap presented a White Paper detailing the approach to artificial intelligence regulation in Ukraine. This document will help companies understand how to prepare for future AI legislation and create products that are safe for citizens.
S. Barbashyn reminded which groups are covered by the AI Act, which was adopted in March 2024 by the European Parliament:
- AI developers are companies, organizations, or individuals that develop artificial intelligence systems. They must comply with the rules on the design, development, and monitoring of AI systems.
- AI suppliers: Those who provide or sell AI-based products in the EU. They must ensure that their AI systems comply with the AI Act.
- AI users are organizations or individuals that use AI systems. Depending on the risk associated with the use of such systems, they may be subject to certain restrictions or monitoring and reporting requirements.
He also drew attention to the risks associated with the use of AI. The AI Act's classification of AI systems by risk level is critical to protecting users and society from potential dangers associated with the use of AI. The establishment of four risk groups allows for the determination of the level of oversight and regulation for each category of systems. Systems with an unacceptable risk are prohibited altogether due to the threat to fundamental human rights, while high-risk systems are subject to strict testing and compliance requirements. This minimizes the likelihood of negative consequences and ensures the safety of users.
This classification also allows regulators and businesses to clearly delineate responsibilities depending on the risk level of AI systems. Companies using high-risk systems should be prepared for additional transparency, risk management, and certification requirements. This is important to maintain user trust and avoid legal issues. At the same time, systems with limited and minimal risk do not need such strict requirements, but must provide a sufficient level of transparency and information.
«Knowledge of these four risk categories allows businesses to properly assess potential threats and plan the implementation of AI technologies accordingly. The correct classification of AI systems helps not only to avoid fines and reputational risks but also promotes the development of ethical and safe use of artificial intelligence in various fields of activity», - summarized S. Barbashyn.
Popular news
Legislation
UNBA initiatives to implement the Roadmap were supported by international experts
International experts who participated in the inaugural meeting of the Working Group on the implementation of the Roadmap on the rule of law in advocacy and agreed to join it expressed their support for the initiative of the Ukrainian National Bar Association.
Legislation
How will the group responsible for implementing the Roadmap for advocacy operate?
The working group on the implementation of the Roadmap on the rule of law in the area of advocacy will operate at several levels: plenary meetings as a platform for adopting framework decisions, a coordination bureau for compiling documents and calendar control, and thematic subgroups for preparing norms and their justification. International experts will verify the results against European standards and «red lines».
Legislation
Advocacy is a responsible entity, not a critic of reform — V. Gvozdiy
The Roadmap on the Rule of Law is not a basis for restructuring the model of advocacy, but a framework for verifying and improving the already European-oriented system. At the same time, part of the work has already been done, so further progress should be made in the form of coordinated and practical decisions.
Legislation
Vatras on the implementation of the Roadmap: only advocates should create their own destiny
Work on implementing the Roadmap in relation to advocacy should be based on the participation of the professional community itself, and key tasks should be structured in such a way as to avoid mixing processes that differ in content and procedure.
Legislation
Roadmap and advocacy: working group holds first meeting
On January 2, the first organizational meeting of the Working Group on the implementation of the Roadmap on the rule of law in the area of advocacy reform took place. The event was devoted to agreeing on the framework for further work and exchanging the initial positions of the participants.
Self-government
BCU: NACP initiatives regarding the Bar are unconstitutional interference
The Bar Council of Ukraine has condemned the initiatives to reform the Bar proposed by the National Agency on Corruption Prevention as direct, gross and systematic interference by the executive branch in the activities of an independent constitutional institution.
Self-government
UNBA program for implementation of the Roadmap on the rule of law published
In order to ensure the implementation of measures set out in the Roadmap on the Rule of Law, the Bar Council of Ukraine approved a program for its implementation in relation to the reform of advocacy.
Professional Conduct
The results of the CISA cannot be used in disciplinary proceedings against advocates – BCU
Materials obtained through covert investigative (search) activities involving interference in private communications cannot be transferred or used in disciplinary proceedings against advocates. This is because the Code of Criminal Procedure does not allow investigators or prosecutors to use such materials outside of criminal proceedings.
Publications
Victoria Yakusha, Law and Business The anti-corruption vertical cannot «take care» of the Bar as an institution, - acting head of the HQDCB
Censor.net Protecting advocates – protecting justice: addressing concerns about the new law
Ihor Kolesnykov A BRIEF SUMMARY REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF THE ORDER ON EXTENDED CONFISCATION IN LATVIA REGARDING FINANCIAL ASSETS OF…
Valentyn Gvozdiy WORKING IN A WAR ZONE
Lydia Izovitova Formula of perfection
Sergiy Vylkov Our judicial system is so built that courts do not trust advocates
Iryna Vasylyk Advocacy in the proclamation of Independence of Ukraine
Oleksandr DULSKY When we cross the border of the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court, we get into another department of the National Anti-Corruption…