Postu­la­te Dobler (23.3201): Legal situa­ti­on of arti­fi­ci­al intel­li­gence – cla­ri­fy uncer­tain­ties, pro­mo­te innovation!

Postu­la­te Dobler (23.3201): Legal situa­ti­on of arti­fi­ci­al intel­li­gence – cla­ri­fy uncer­tain­ties, pro­mo­te innovation!

Sub­mit­ted text

Not only sin­ce the appli­ca­ti­on Chat GPT by Open AI was made publicly available, it is clear that deve­lo­p­ments in the field of arti­fi­ci­al intel­li­gence (AI) are beco­ming incre­a­sing­ly dyna­mic and pro­found. It is important to exami­ne whe­ther the legal frame­work is desi­gned in such a way that our legal system and its prin­ci­ples con­ti­n­ue to app­ly with new technologies.

The Fede­ral Coun­cil is char­ged with,

1. report on whe­ther and whe­re it is curr­ent­ly in the legis­la­ti­ve and legal prac­ti­ce Gaps iden­ti­fi­edwhich mean that our legal system does not do justi­ce to the deve­lo­p­ments sur­roun­ding AI.

2. to take a posi­ti­on on whe­ther the cur­rent legal prac­ti­ce suf­fi­ci­ent is to coun­ter the incre­a­sing uncer­tain­ty on the part of the popu­la­ti­on out­side the are­as of law direct­ly appli­ca­ble to the fede­ral government.

In doing so, it should be gui­ded by a tech­no­lo­gy-neu­tral approach.

Based on this ana­ly­sis shall:

3. be checked whe­ther a Stra­tegybased on a risk-oppor­tu­ni­ty ana­ly­sis by a group of experts from busi­ness, sci­ence and NGOs.

4. if neces­sa­ry, a Con­cept on the need for legis­la­ti­ve action be pre­pared, in which the prio­ri­ties, the time­ta­ble for the imple­men­ta­ti­on of the neces­sa­ry mea­su­res and the pro­vi­si­on of the neces­sa­ry resour­ces are executed.


The Con­fe­de­ra­ti­on has respon­ded to the incre­a­sing importance of AI, ans­we­ring requests on the sub­ject, publi­shing docu­ments and gui­de­lines on risks and oppor­tu­ni­ties, and con­vening expert panels. Worth men­tio­ning are the Fede­ral gui­de­lines on AI, the Digi­tal Switz­er­land Stra­tegy, the report of the inter­de­part­ment­al working group on arti­fi­ci­al intel­li­gence (IDAG KI), and the FSO Arti­fi­ci­al Intel­li­gence Com­pe­tence Net­work (CNAI). The revi­sed Data Pro­tec­tion Act also covers cri­ti­cal are­as whe­re AI is applied. The­se are important first steps, but it is not clear if they are suf­fi­ci­ent. Uncer­tain­ties exist espe­ci­al­ly in are­as out­side the scope of the fede­ral govern­ment (pri­va­te and civil law), whe­re a frame of refe­rence that also inclu­des the pri­va­te sec­tor is lar­ge­ly lacking.

In terms of for­eign poli­cy, Switz­er­land is in the “Com­mit­tee on Arti­fi­ci­al Intel­li­gence”(CAI) of the Coun­cil of Euro­pe, whe­re pri­va­te sec­tor actors also par­ti­ci­pa­te in the deli­be­ra­ti­ons, and acts as a cons­truc­ti­ve part­ner for bin­ding gui­de­lines within the mem­bers of the Coun­cil of Euro­pe. Now it should do the same in a coher­ent way in terms of dome­stic poli­cy. Instead of sim­ply con­ti­nuing to wait, Switz­er­land can fur­ther pro­mo­te its tech­no­lo­gi­cal inno­va­ti­on base and expand into the field of AI if the topic is addres­sed with a prag­ma­tic approach is coun­te­red (ana­log­ous to DLT legis­la­ti­on) and proac­ti­ve gaps are iden­ti­fi­ed in the sen­se of “as much as neces­sa­ry, as litt­le as pos­si­ble” and – whe­re neces­sa­ry – adjust­ments are made.

The EU has set the ball rol­ling for Euro­pe-wide AI regu­la­ti­on with the help of the EU AI Act, which was pre­sen­ted as ear­ly as 2021. Alt­hough the AI Act has not yet been ful­ly nego­tia­ted, it is alre­a­dy clear that the EU is aiming for a gene­ral umbrel­la solu­ti­on, while regu­la­ti­on will be suc­ce­s­si­ve­ly dif­fe­ren­tia­ted from sec­tor to sec­tor in sepa­ra­te laws and regulations.

The ulti­m­ate­ly resul­ting EU regu­la­ti­on on AI will also have an impact on Switz­er­land in the fore­seeable future due to its extra­ter­ri­to­ri­al effect.




Rela­ted articles