AI除了政务还可以应用在哪些方面

113.Our AI regulation framework applies to the whole of the UK.AI is used in various sectors and impacts on a wide range of policy areas,some of which are reserved and some of which are devolved.We will continue to consider any devolution impacts of AI regulation as the policy develops and in advance of any legislative action.Some regulators share remits with their counterparts in the devolved administrations.Our framework,to be initially set out on a nonstatutory basis,will not alter the current territorial arrangement of AI policy.We will rely on the interactions with existing legislation on reserved matters,such as the Data Protection Act 2018 and the Equality Act 2010,to implement our framework.114.We will continue to engage devolved administrations,businesses,and members of the public from across the UK to ensure that every part of the country benefits from our pro-innovation approach.We will,for example,convene the devolved administrations for views on the functions we expect the government to perform and on the potential implications of introducing a statutory duty on regulators to have due regard to the principles.[heading2]5.2 Extraterritorial application of the regulatory[content]115.While we expect our principles-based approach to influence the global conversation on AI governance,we are not currently proposing the introduction of new legal requirements.Our framework will not therefore change the territorial applicability of existing legislation relevant to AI(including,for example,data protection legislation).67A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation

fundamental rights of the affected persons,notably their rights to free movement,nondiscrimination,protection of private life and personal data,international protection and good administration.It is therefore appropriate to classify as high-risk AI systems intended to be used by or on behalf of competent public authorities or by Union agencies,offices or bodies charged with tasks in the fields of migration,asylum and border control management as polygraphs and similar tools insofar as their use is permitted under relevant Union and national law,for assessing certain risks posed by natural persons entering the territory of a Member State or applying for visa or asylum;for verifying the authenticity of the relevant documents of natural persons;for assisting competent public authorities for the examination and assessment of the veracity of evidence in relation to applications for asylum,visa and residence permits and associated complaints with regard to the objective to establish the eligibility of the natural persons applying for a status;for monitoring,surveilling or processing personal data in the context of border management activities,for the purpose of detecting,recognising or identifying natural persons;for the forecasting or prediction of trends related to migration movements and border crossings.AI systems in the area of migration,asylum and border control management covered by this Regulation should comply with the relevant procedural requirements set by the Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council49,the Regulation(EC)No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council50 and other relevant legislation.The use of AI systems in migration,asylum and border control management should in no circumstances be used by Member States or Union institutions,agencies or bodies as a means to circumvent their international obligations under the Convention of 28 July 1951 relating to the Status of__________________49 Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection(OJ L 180,29.6.2013,p.60).

Text proposed by the Commission(39)AI systems used in migration,asylum and border control management affect people who are often in particularly vulnerable position and who are dependent on the outcome of the actions of the competent public authorities.The accuracy,non-discriminatory nature and transparency of the AI systems used in those contexts are therefore particularly important to guarantee the respect of theshould include in particular AI systems intended to be used by or on behalf of law enforcement authorities or by Union agencies,offices or bodies in support of law enforcement authorities,as polygraphs and similar tools insofar as their use is permitted under relevant Union and national law,for the evaluation of the reliability of evidence in criminal proceedings,for profiling in the course of detection,investigation or prosecution of criminal offences,as well as for crime analytics regarding natural persons.AI systems specifically intended to be used for administrative proceedings by tax and customs authorities should not be classified as high-risk AI systems used by law enforcement authorities for the purposes of prevention,detection,investigation and prosecution of criminal offences.The use of AI tools by law enforcement and judicial authorities should not become a factor of inequality,social fracture or exclusion.The impact of the use of AI tools on the defence rights of suspects should not be ignored,notably the difficulty in obtaining meaningful information on their functioning and the consequent difficulty in challenging their results in court,in particular by individuals under investigation.