Published papers

法令遵守への取り組みが、新技術の研究開発や利用ではイノベーションを阻害するという指摘や、法的視点からの検討が技術開発と相反すると考えられがちである。しかし、法を守るためにロボットを活用する研究を行い、新興技術開発を促進する方法や法的課題を技術で解決する方策を検討する必要がある。具体的には、「ロボットを用いた法令遵守の促進」の研究の重要性を提唱する。

The purpose of this paper is to examine the legal implications of cybernetic avatars (CA), which will be used in our daily life as remotely operated and autonomous robots. Such legal aspects consider the research, development, and use of 'cyber-physical systems (CPS)', which combine 'cyber' and 'physical' elements, and are referred to as the ‘avatar law’. The legal issues regarding CA need to be considered from the same perspective not only in Japan but also internationally.

「AI原則ブーム」が到来するとの予想のもとで、AI原則を単なる非拘束的な原則として活用を求める段階から、AIの実用・実装に対応した法規範においてその活用を考えるべきではないかという提案を試みることが本稿の目的である。 第三次AIブームの興隆によって、社会の様々な場面でAIの研究開発からその活用が現実化するとともに、その適正な利用のために原則策定の重要性が認識されるようになりつつある。そのため、エマージング・テクノロジー（新興技術）の活用を見据えて必要な対応を推進するための取り組みとして、基本法的なものを整備することで非拘束的な「原則」と謳ってきたものを基本原則として定めたり、法定公表事項として当該原則を組み込んだルール作りを考えることはできないだろうか。 新たな問題に対応するためのルール作りは、EUにおける取り組みが様々な局面で先行しているが、「AI規制」に向けた検討においても同じ図式が繰り返されようとしている。本稿では、国内外における原則・ガイドライン等策定の現況を概観するとともに、EUにおける検討動向について、「信頼できるAIのための倫理ガイドライン」の内容と「評価リスト」に至るまでの動向から、AI規制の方向性を示すホワイト・ペーパーの内容を概観することで、今後の規制に向けた方向性を把握する。これは我が国における今後の取り組みを考えるうえで、EUの取り組みを参考にすることは重要であるとの認識に基づくものである。 　最後に、OECDが「人口知能に関する理事会勧告」を採択した意義とともに、法的拘束力を有さない原則が法整備において参照されているOECDプライバシー・ガイドラインの位置づけを再確認することで、非拘束的なガイドラインではあるものの、OECDプライバシー８原則が各国の法制度において参照されるに至っている点に着目し、非拘束的原則が普遍的原則として用いられてきたことを敷衍する。

The issues related to personal information protection have been drastically changed through the following stages: (1) progress of processing by computer, (2) development of the Internet, (3) spread of SNS and smartphones, (4) evolution of AI, (5) development of IoT and 5G technologies. Based on these alterations in the handling of personal information, this paper introduces the following: environmental transitions and legal system for the protection of personal information, overview of the personal information protection law, definition of personal information, differences between personal information protection and the right to privacy, past and future review of personal information protection system, new data protection framework between Japan and EU.

Emerging technologies such as AI and autonomous robots and the consideration to increasetheir industrial use are rapidly progressing. Furthermore, research anddevelopment of lethalautonomous weapon systems（LAWS）are also advancing. As part of an international debate,regulations in the framework of the Convention on the Restriction of the Use of Certain ConventionalWeapons（CCW）have been discussed and basic principles have been proposed. In this article, theinternational humanitarian law applicable to LAWS, the report of the United Nations DisarmamentInstitute（UNIDIR), the status of discussions from the level of informal LAWS experts meetings to theGovernment Expert Meeting（GGE）on the LAWS lethal autonomous weapon system, the contents ofproposed guiding principles, and the status of consideration regarding legal and ethical aspects forregulating LAWS are described and confirmed.

We need to have a response to the COVID-19 Coronavirus infection which will lead to effective countermeasures against any future pandemics caused by infectious and deadly diseases. These diseases could have a serious impact on the lives and health of people worldwide, therefore, this paper will examine, from the point of view of the handling of personal information and the protection of the right to privacy, methods by which we may create these effective countermeasures against any unknown infectious diseases. We will begin our discussion by determining exactly what a pandemic is, based on the definition by CDC and WHO. A part of this determining will lead us inevitably to a review the Japanese legal system for dealing with pandemics and not only taking into account such pandemics which have been caused by naturally occurring infectious diseases, but also those which have been the result of attacks using biological weapons or bio-hazardous terrorism. 　Having a comprehensive pandemic legal system response will require the collection, utilisation and publication of infectious disease-related information based on the Infectious Disease Law. We will also need to clarify the structure and issues of the current system/mechanism regarding information acquisition and the management of infected people. 　Thus, this paper will scrutinise the handling procedures for personal information acquired in the course of implementing infectious disease countermeasures, the issues related to the applicable laws and regulations, the collecting and utilisation of sensitive information related to disease. The procedures regarding the use and provision of personal data. Finally, I will attempt to propose a new theory from the point of view formulating new judgment criteria regarding the limits of interpretation of exemptions based on the improvement of public health and the need .

The following perspectives will be deliberated with regard to fundamental considerations for ensuring both the effectiveness of infectious disease control measures and the guarantee of the right to privacy: 　(1) issues concerning the restriction of the right to privacy in emergency situations, including: (i) measures associated with emergency situations and the restriction of the right to privacy in a such situations; (ii) normalisation, regularisation and the continuing of exceptional responses in emergency situations, (eg concerns about 'roll-back' and the 'ratchet effect'); (iii) use for purposes different from those originally intended, ('Dual-Use'); and (iv) acquisition of subsidiary information and unexpected emergence of unexpected situations, (eg the applicability of 'human-body temperature' to personal information requiring consideration and subsidiary information associated with the measurement of human-body temperature and the example of 'mission creep'); and (ⅴ) the need to respond to over-reactions which do not recognise the urgency of the situation. 　(2) Issues concerning privacy in infectious disease control include: (i) procedures for requesting and disclosing personal information and the issues related to privacy; (ii) the obligation to cooperate with active epidemiological surveys of specified patients and others based on the revised Infectious Diseases Control Act and restrictions on the right to privacy; (iii) the correspondence between the personal information taken and thus, sensitive personal information acquired in relation to the taking of tests, etc, (iv) the implementation of tests for infectious diseases which are not included in the tests to be taken and the violation of privacy and (ⅴ)the necessity of thorough security management measures for information management in relation to countermeasures against infectious diseases. 　(3) The use of technology for infectious disease-control and privacy: (i) the use of GPS location information, (ii) the introduction of contact-tracing and confirmation applications and the considerations required to resolve concerns about their widespread use, (iii) the acquisition of biometric information and the use of biometrics, and (iv) sewage epidemiological surveys and privacy, (eg the privacy of waste-water).

「人工知能に関する整合規則（人工知能法）の制定および関係法令の改正に関する欧州議会及び理事会の規則提案」（以下「規則案」という）が2021年4月21日に公表された。AIシステムのリスクに応じて利用禁止も含むAI規制を定めている。従来からEU市場に上市する製品の製造者や輸入者等に課されている製品安全規制同様の義務を，高リスクに分類されるAIシステムにも拡充してCEマーキングの対象とし，そのための適合性評価および第三者認証制度について定め，新たな整合法令の整備を目指す規則案について解説する。

「サイバネティック・アバター（CA）」の研究開発、利用、社会実装及びに受容性に係る法的課題について、従来からのELSI課題の抽出や分析にとどまらず、「サイバー」と「フィジカル」の双方の問題が融合する「サイバー・フィジカル・システム（CPS）」の研究開発及び利用に伴う法的課題の展開も踏まえたCAに係る法律論を「アバター法」と称し検討に着手。CAの法的位置づけ（存在証明）を検討するための新説を展開し、有体物CAと無体物CAに分けた定義を試み、CAを社会で利用するにあたって、その展開・実装のあり方についての今後の検討に向けた試論として、「本人」による「本体」の利用形態を考案した。当該「本体」の利用形態については、①顕名CAと②匿名CAに分けて検討を行う試論を展開し、CAの研究開発においては、顕名CAと連結可能匿名CAの利用に向けた検討を研究開発の段階から行っておくことが有用であるとの提案を示した。連結不可能匿名CAの研究開発の危険性を指摘するとともに、当該危険性を排除するため本人と本体CAとの連結可能性を担保する仕組みとして、適合性評価や第三者認証の仕組みが必要であるとの見解も示した。

In order to make use of the response to the new the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) for pandemic countermeasures due to infectious diseases that may have a serious impact on the lives and health of the people, which may occur in the future, the handling of personal information and the protection of privacy necessary to ensure the effectiveness of countermeasures against infectious diseases will be examined. This paper intends to establish to comprehensively understand the systems for the collection and publication of information related to infectious diseases based on the Infectious Diseases Control Law, and to clarify the structure and issues of the current systems and mechanisms for the collection and management of information on infected persons.

データの取扱内容の多様化とその量の増加によって個人の権利利益に及ぼす影響が増している。個人情報保護の失敗と法執行事例を手がかりに、個人に関する情報の適正かつ適法な取扱いと違法な取扱いの境界を見極めつつ、データの利活用と適正な保護に資する個人情報保護制度の発展に向けて必要な課題について考察した。

© WMSCI 2020 - 24th World Multi-Conference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, Proceedings. All rights reserved. In the future, autonomous robots equipped with artificial intelligence (AI) will become more widespread in our society. These emerging technologies are driving the consideration of not only improvements in the development of their industrial use, but also further research into the ethical and legal issues. For example, robot acquisition of data in the form of 'life-logs' may lead to data confidentiality issues which we are not able to solve by focusing solely on AI data acquisition issues. A life-log is a comprehensive archive of personal, everyday life which is collected by computing technologies. This information is sometimes used for business purposes, such as online behavioural advertising. However, the meaning of the term life-log is vague. Similarly, the distinction between Personally Identifiable Information (PII) and Non-Personally Identifiable Information (non-PII) is not clear. In this paper, I detail and explain the current and complete range of legal accountability issues related to the collection of data for constructing a life-log. I propose a method for managing legal responsibility when life-logs are created and then used by others, whether they are individuals or organisations. Finally, I indicate the need to both clarify and streamline any future regulations related to life-logs.