The Dynamics of Artificial Intelligence Regulation in the National Legal System and its Implications for Legal Certainty

Yohanna YR Watofa

doi:10.59890/ijla.v4i2.194

Authors

Yohanna YR Watofa Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Hukum Manokwari

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59890/ijla.v4i2.194

Keywords:

Artificial Intelligence Regulation, Legal Certainty, National Legal System, Technology Law, Digital Governance

Abstract

This study examines the phenomenon of the criminalization of bank management decisions resulting from law enforcement’s failure to distinguish between business risks (breach of contract) and banking crimes. The principle of prudence is often interpreted broadly, so that financial losses resulting from non-performing loans are easily drawn into the criminal realm, as reflected in Supreme Court Cassation Decision No. 8506 K/Pid.Sus/2025, which overturned an acquittal (onslag). Using a normative legal research method with legislative, conceptual, and case-based approaches, this study analyzes the parameters of criminal liability through the lens of the theory of legal certainty, the Business Judgment Rule (BJR), and the principle of ultimum remedium. The research findings indicate that credit defaults constitute a civil-law business risk.

References

Abbott, R. (2020). The reasonable robot: Artificial intelligence and the law. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108689438.

Binns, R. (2022). The ethics of artificial intelligence: Issues and initiatives. Philosophy Compass, 17(1), e12764. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12764.

Burrell, J. (2021). How the machine ‘thinks’: Understanding opacity in machine learning algorithms. Big Data & Society, 8(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951721991503.

Cath, C., Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2022). Artificial intelligence and the ‘good society’: The US, EU, and UK approach. Science and Engineering Ethics, 28(2), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00367-9.

Crootof, R., Ard, B., & Kuner, C. (2023). AI and the law: Emerging regulatory frameworks in the digital era. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 36(2), 425–468. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4218769.

Ebers, M. (2022). Regulating AI and robotics: Ethics by design in a digital society. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 13(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2021.82.

Edwards, L. (2023). Regulating AI in Europe: Four problems and four solutions. European Law Journal, 29(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12405.

Floridi, L., Cowls, J., King, T., & Taddeo, M. (2022). How to design AI for social good: Seven essential factors. Science and Engineering Ethics, 28(3), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00313-9.

Gasser, U., & Almeida, V. (2022). A layered model for AI governance. IEEE Internet Computing, 26(2), 59–65. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIC.2022.3147025.

Kelsen, H. (2021). General theory of law and state. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003062046.

Mak, V. (2022). Legal scholarship and doctrinal research in the age of digital transformation. Law and Method, 12, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.5553/REM/.000066.

Marchant, G. E., & Allenby, B. R. (2022). Artificial intelligence and the future of regulation. Journal of Law, Technology & Policy, 2022(1), 1–24.

OECD. (2023). OECD framework for the governance of artificial intelligence. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://doi.org/10.1787/9a3e9e7f-en.

Robinson, N. (2023). Governing artificial intelligence in national legal systems. Computer Law & Security Review, 49, 105754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2023.105754.

Scherer, M. U. (2021). Regulating artificial intelligence systems: Risks, challenges, competencies, and strategies. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 29(2), 353–400.

Smuha, N. A. (2021). From a “race to AI” to a “race to AI regulation”: Regulatory competition for artificial intelligence. Law, Innovation and Technology, 13(1), 57–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2021.1898300.

Taekema, S. (2021). Methodologies of rule of law research: Why legal philosophy needs empirical and doctrinal methods. Law and Method, 11, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.5553/REM/.000063.

Ulnicane, I., Knight, W., Leach, T., Stahl, B. C., & Wanjiku, W. (2021). Framing governance for a contested emerging technology: Insights from AI policy. Policy and Society, 40(2), 158–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2021.1898372.

Veale, M., & Borgesius, F. Z. (2021). Demystifying the draft EU Artificial Intelligence Act. Computer Law Review International, 22(4), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.9785/cri-2021-220402.

Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., & Russell, C. (2022). Why fairness cannot be automated: Bridging the gap between EU non-discrimination law and AI. Computer Law & Security Review, 45, 105615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2022.105615.

Yeung, K., & Lodge, M. (2020). Algorithmic regulation: An overview. In The Oxford handbook of regulation and technology. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198838196.013.2.

Zerilli, J., Knott, A., Maclaurin, J., & Gavaghan, C. (2021). Transparency in algorithmic and human decision-making: Is there a double standard? Philosophy & Technology, 34(4), 661–683. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00402-3