JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA

NEW DELHI

FACULTY OF LAW

JURISPRUDENCE -II

LEGAL PERSONALITY- ARTIFICIAL

INTELLIGENCE AS A LEGAL PERSONALITY

SUBMITTED TO
Dr. Subhradipta Sarkar
SUBMITTED BY
RAVIKANT (SELF-FINANCE)
(ROLL NO – 49 (20186226))
ZARAMUMTAZ (REGULAR)
(ROLL NO - 70 (20185344))

1
TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................3
LEGAL PERSONALITY (PERSON)..................................................................................................4
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) .................................................................................................4
AI AS A LEGAL PERSONALITY ......................................................................................................5
LEGAL STATUS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ...................................................................6
Saudi Arabia Case: ............................................................................................................................7
Japanese Case: ...................................................................................................................................7
WHY IS IT NECESSARY TO GRANT AI THE LEGAL PERSONALITY STATUS?................8
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AS SUBJECTS OF LAW IN LEGAL SYSTEMS .....................9
LIABILITY OF AN AI ENTITY .......................................................................................................11
CHALLENGES FOR ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE .................................................................12
CONCLUSION: ...................................................................................................................................14
BIBLIOGRAPHY: ..............................................................................................................................15

2
INTRODUCTION
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is an evolving discipline, which has no single definition yet. The
term of AI was first reported in 1956; the system is often defined as artificially generated
intelligence connected to rapidly developing techniques that enable intelligent, i.e. human-like,
function of computers. The system of AI is not same as other normal computer algorithms
(programs) due to their uniqueness since they can adapt freely, assemble insight, and concoct
various arrangements dependent on the examination of different circumstances autonomously
of the desire of their designer AI can work independently instead of naturally, for instance,
Google Self-Driving Cars, autopilots controlling planes., digital assistants such as Siri,
Cortana, and Google Now, robot nurses, mind-controlled Google smart glasses, etc. These and
many other technologies are known worldwide and their skill is fast evolving, just like use. As
the use of AI-based technology becomes more and more popular, the number of associated
incidents is now also growing. For example: (1) Google Self-Driving Car had 11 accidents
resulting in harm in 1.7 million miles of travel; (2) robot nurses reminding patients to take their
medicine fails to confirm that medicines were actually taken, which may lead to the death of
the patient. These specific examples show that artificial intelligence is not mere science fiction.

These and different advances are known worldwide and their ability, just as use, is quickly
developing. First of all, our world has been drastically transformed by digital technology in
general and artificial intelligence in particular. Researchers re-examine the modern legal
system in terms of relevance in the context of the last changes in society when they analyze the
issue of AI as a legal person. There is various number of problems: how it refers to moral laws,
how it impacts the economy, what would be the consequences etc. Secondly, such a study is
generally concentrated on the pros and cons of understanding other subjects' legal personality.
Such research essentially makes us prepared for the rapid changes that are taking place.There
is an expectation that it would be adopted extremely rapidly after creating a sufficiently
intelligent system because of the significant economic benefits. It means that there would be
no time for social, legal, and moral systems to adapt. We attempted to address the question as
to how we should treat AI as a legal citizen. What does a list of requirements that helps to make
a judgment on the grant of legal personality have to be taken into account?

3
LEGAL PERSONALITY (PERSON)

According, to Salmond: "A person is any being whom the law regards as capable of rights or
duties. Any being that is so capable is a person, whether a human being or not and no being
that is not so capable is a person, even though he be a man. Persons are the substances of which
rights and duties are the attributes. It is only in this respect that persons possess juridical
significance and this is the exclusive point of view from which personality receives local
recognition"1

“The word 'individual' is gotten from the Latin word persona”. It denotes not only human being
but anybody or anything which permitted to assert legal claims or subjected to legal duties.
From the lawful aspect, the veil of character doesn't really need to be worn by individuals.
Lawful people are made artificially and the law remembered them as legitimate individuals.
They are people just in the eye of the law not by and large. They are likewise made by legitimate
fiction and accordingly called as invented too They are called different names like imaginary,
juristic, fake, or good, and so on. For example, in law idols, dead man, corporations, companies,
idols, etc. are treated as legal persons. A juristic or legitimate individual is one to which law
ascribes lawful character. The term character has a more extensive centrality than humankind.
Under the Indian Penal Code, the word individual incorporates any organization or affiliation,
or assemblage of people, if consolidated.2

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI)

AI is a new discipline, which covers a broad field. It has no single meaning, therefore. The
emergence of the First One personal computer, AI production and research began. The term
was first discussed by John McCarthy in 1956.3 While the use of AI in many people's daily
lives is becoming more and more extensive, an accurate definition of AI is still difficult to
come up with. The latter covers vast fields of cycles from fundamental assignments, for
example, legitimate thinking, to explicit ones playing chess, checking numerical hypotheses,
and so on. AI is characterized by various authors as artificially created intelligence, such as a
software system that can replace human thought using a computer or other device (household
management systems integrated with household devices, robots, robots, etc.). AI is categorised
by the International Dictionary Artificial Intelligence as a term of system concerned with the

1
V.D. Mahajan, Jurisprudence and Legal Theory 377-378 (Eastern Book Company, 5th Edition, 2020)
2
Ibid.
3
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/john-mccarthy-computer-scientist-known-father-ai-
6255307.html (last visited on October 21, 2020).

4
rapid application of methods to enable computers to behave intelligently, like the human being.
The system of AI needs many approaches 4 to understand it & these are the two modes
following-

• the first one is usually acceptable to philosophers who can see intelligence in AI as
something possessing all skills and characteristics attributable to human intelligence is
known as Strong intelligence. 5
• As an alternative to this technique, there is intelligence imitated by computer
programmes known as poor intelligence.

Weak intelligence best expressed by the Turing test 6 developed to reveal the level of
intelligence of a computer. The test is taken by asking a person and a computer with same type
of questions. The person asking the questions Does not distinguish the difference between the
person's answers and the computer, the test is said to have passed and is referred to as AI,
irrespective of how these questions were perceived by the person asking the questions.

All of the above meanings of AI imply that AI has a direct correlation with intellectual abilities,
the capacity to comprehend, learn and construct independent choices independent of the
developer or user's will. The main difference between AI and human intelligence is its artificial
(synthetic) nature.

AI AS A LEGAL PERSONALITY

Legal Personality is characteristically connected to singular self-sufficiency yet has not been
allowed solely to people. No law right now in power perceives AI as a lawful individual. Be
that as it may, with Sophia, a humanoid being allowed citizenship by Saudi Arabia, combined
with the ongoing mishap brought about by Uber's self-driving vehicle, it has gotten basic to
address the lawful character of AI.

Whether or not legal personality can be given on an AI reduces to whether it tends to be made
the subject of lawful rights and obligations. The legal fiction made for corporates fills in as a
point of reference for giving lawful character to AI. Nonetheless, there exists a qualification

4
https://towardsai.net/p/artificial-intelligence/understanding-artificial-intelligence (last visited on October
22,2020).
5
https://www.machinedesign.com/markets/robotics/article/21835139/whats-the-difference-between-weak-and-
strong-ai (last visited on October 22,2020).
6
https://www.javatpoint.com/turing-test-in-ai (last visited on October 22,2020).

5
among corporates and AI. Corporates are falsely free, yet responsible by means of their
partners, while an AI might be really autonomous.

A potential centre ground might be allowing AI a heap of rights chose from those as of now
attributed to legitimate people. Be that as it may, solid strides in such a manner are yet to be
seen.

LEGAL STATUS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

There are new markets that are formed arising out of the technological development in the
digital world. This, in turn, gives rise to a certain new subject for the legal field that also
involves Artificial Intelligence. The problem which is arises out of the above is that the
technology may force to displace the market economy and coercing the professionals out of
their jobs and thus causing unemployment as there are already developments that displace
lawyers from the market, the situation for lawyers provides very little hope.

• The Do Not Pay chat in the United Kingdom is one such example of technology
substituting the duties of lawyers and it has reached about one thousand fields of law.
This chat box came into the light because it had challenged around one lakh sixty
thousand illegal parking tickets that were issued to the owners of the car and this
challenge was successful. 7
• Sberbank8, in the country Russia had launched a robot lawyer and the purpose of this
robot lawyer was to file the claims for the individuals. Likewise, a business had
launched a bot and the aim of this bot was to resolve a dispute arising from insurance.

Thus, it was believed that to curb the advancing technological trend one needs legislation
to regulate them. This issue is closely analysed by both the researchers and other
professionals in the legal field. After analysing all the issues and the development in the
technical world in the field of law it was held and believed by professionals that a
significant importance must be made to the issue of dealing with artificial intelligence as a
new subject in control with administrative and civil and even criminal cases within the rule
of that AI will be representing the human beings.

7
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/28/chatbot-ai-lawyer-donotpay-parking-tickets-london-
new-york (last visited on October 23, 2020).
8
https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/trending/bsrzdu_aoa8zcdv-4w0t0a2 (last
visited on October 23, 2020).

6
There are two ways to implement the AI; first, it is either implemented in the form of software,
for example, Siri, Alexa, chatbots or virtual reality and the form for the implementation of AI
is by program, for example, one can say drones and robots. The distinction between a software
AI and a programmed AI is that there is no material shell in the software AI. Some instances
represent that the AI status is in contradiction with legal national norms:

Saudi Arabia Case:

It was declared in the year 2017 by Riyadh the there is a robot named Sofia that considers itself
as a robot that has been granted within the citizenship of Saudi Arabia. 9 This, in turn, had
contradicted various legal norms and conditions of Saudi Arabia

The first rule contradicts the norm of citizenship of Saudi Arabia that is given or acquired in
the following ways : firstly, it can be acquired by birth in which it is stated that birth must be
in a traditional family where the mother and father must be citizens of Saudi Arabia; secondly,
there must be a birth in Saudi Arabia of one of the legal entities, which means a family where
the mother and father must be citizens of Saudi Arabia; Thirdly, where there is no provision
for the birth of a subject where the mother is a national and the father, the subject must have a
permanent address and be fluent in Arabic.

Japanese Case:

In the country of Japan in the year 2017 japan provided with a residence permit to a chatbot
which was name Shibuya Mirai 10 under a special regulation. This induces and contradicts,
however, the permit procedure that has been developed in Japan. There are a set of people who
get the permission for citizenship in japan which include participants in the family reunification
program, businessman and entrepreneurs doing their business in Japan, foreign specialist who
have been employed in Japanese companies, athletes of world levels, artists of world level and
recognition, people who have married a Japanese citizen, a foreign student who studies in a
Japanese college for a higher education.

After seeing all the above points that one needs to fulfil to get a permission for the citizenship
none of those points were attained by the AI Shibuya Mirai as neither the chatbot was
developed in Japan nor it had met the criteria of naturalization. This is one of the key reasons

9
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zarastone/2017/11/07/everything-you-need-to-know-about-sophia-the-worlds-
first-robot-citizen/?sh=5d594b8e46fa (last visited on October 24,2020).
10
https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/tokyos-ai-boy-first-bot-to-gain-a-residency/article19982384.ece
(last visited on October 24, 2020).

7
why AI will not replace a human being because, as a human being, it does not have rights and
duties.

WHY IS IT NECESSARY TO GRANT AI THE LEGAL PERSONALITY STATUS?

Artificial intelligence (AI) will change into a certain piece of society later on. Researchers over
the world are attempting to make independent AI and will have the option to think These
machines will have emotional intelligence which will diminish the line demarcating among
humans and the machines. 11 As the human correspondence increments with these machines it
will in this manner offer move to main problems. For example, who will be held subject for
any criminal threat ascending out of the activities of AI. Hereafter, our overall game plan of
laws ought to be ready for these moving toward difficulties. Attribution of genuine character
to artificial intelligence can be an astonishing measure to check all potential challenges by the
presentation of AI in our general populace. It is necessary to treat Artificial Intelligence entities
as legal personalities in order to make them responsible under the law for the act they commit
just like corporation. In the event that we get the relationship from the rationale behind agreeing
legal personality to enterprises, which was to restrict the corporate risk on a person's shoulder
which would thus persuade individuals to take part in business exercises by methods for
enterprises. In a similar vein, the idea of legal personhood ought to be stretched out to artificial
intelligence elements as is concurred to corporate bodies. This will empower the current legal
system to Possibly handle impending difficulties by artificial intelligence. Besides, there will
be no prerequisite to make considerable changes in our legal system to viably tackle artificial
intelligence related issues. One such concern which appropriately stresses designers of artificial
intelligence is the risk emerging from its activities. When artificial intelligence creates to a
level where it starts to really figure, it will be occupied with a few assignments. Criminal and
Civil Liability may tend to emerge from these activities, imagine a scenario in which a PC goes
into an agreement. which isn't refined for sure if a PC harms another individual. Presently the
inquiry emerges who will be held obligated for these activities of the PC, will its proprietor or
the engineers be exclusively ascribed to these liabilities however they never proposed such an
act. Imagine a scenario where an autopilot of contender aircraft recognizes its pilot as an.
hindrance in its central goal and launches the pilot when he prematurely ends the mission
because of awful climate which executes the pilot. The designer of autopilot might be
considered responsible however he had no goal to slaughter the pilot in the current legal system.

11
Rafael A. Calvo, Sidney K. D’Mello, Jonathan Gratch & Arvid Kappas, The Oxford handbook of affective
computing 176 (1st edition, Oxford 2015).

8
Nonetheless, if the artificial intelligence is viewed as a legal substance it very well may be held
subject for its own activities. For this situation, the autopilot can be considered responsible
which will spare the designers from obligation. At that point the calculations of the AI can be
adjusted by reinventing. This will spare the innocent developers of the AI as well as its owners
from liability arising from an act which they never intended and will promote the development
of the AI field as it will save discouragement of AI developers and its users and will also
promote more innovations into the artificial intelligence field. Like in corporations if a person
is found to take unfair advantage of the legal personality of the corporation, then the courts
pierce through the corporate shield and hold such person accountable. This process of lifting
of corporate veil can be adopted in case if any person uses artificial intelligence as a means to
satisfy his own selfish motives or to save himself from any criminal liability. 12 over years many
precedents have been established, a pertinent example is the case of “computer raped by
telephone” which was widely covered by the media. In this case, a computer programmer broke
into a computer to steal private data by using a telephone link. During the investigation it a
search warrant was issued to the computer for examination of its data and components. This
was the first case where the world witnessed that a machine was being treated like a legal
person.13 A leading example into this field is legislation on the auto-pilot. In Klein v. U.S.14,
the pilot put the plane on autopilot at the time of landing while the regulations strictly prohibit
the use of auto-pilot for landing. The auto-pilot erroneously did a bad landing causing severe
damage to the plane. In this case, though there was an error on the part of auto-pilot but pilot
was behind such an error and therefore he was held liable for the damages caused to the plane.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AS SUBJECTS OF LAW IN LEGAL SYSTEMS

One of the features identifying the subject of law is an entity 's capacity to obtain rights. 15In
any case, making the legal status subordinate upon the direct furthest reaches of the entity to
have rights would very expand or confine the outline of subjects of law, as all living parts
arranged for feeling would considering everything be treated as subjects of law or, on the
converse as torpid parts, would be shed from the request. In this way, to pick if an entity can
be treated as a subject of law, the going with conditions should be considered:

• The ability to acquire rights and fulfil obligations.

12
BSN (UK) Ltd. v. Janardan Mohandas Rajan Pillai [1996] 86 Com Cases 371 (Bom).
13
Ward v. Superior Court of California [1972] 3 C.L.S.R. 206.
14
United States v. Klein, 80 U.S. 128 (1871)

9
 • Persons who participate in legal relations are subjects of law.16

For a person or legal entity to qualify as a subject of legal relations, they have to possess certain
characteristics comprised of two structural elements:17

• legal capacity;
• Capacity to act.

a characteristic inquiry emerges: is it conceivable to apply the above components of legal

character i.e.

Systems of Artificial Intelligence, legal capacity and ability to act? Two categories of legal
subjects are recognised under current civil law and common law traditions: natural persons and
legal entities.18A natural person is often defined as subject of law who is not assimilated with
a legal entity.19

According to Hans Kelsen, it would be wrong to identify a natural person with a biological
status of human being, because a natural person is a mere personalization of legal norms
granting rights and imposing obligations that govern human behaviour. 20

According to J. Austin believes that a natural person is a human being with rights and
obligations and an equivalent of a biological being. 21

The current struggle plainly shows that, in spite of long-standing legal customs, similarity of a
characteristic individual as the subject of law and an organic being still raises conversations
among legal logicians. In this specific circumstance, it should be noticed that SAI and issues
identified with their legal character will stay an important point of conversation for a long time
to come There is another group of individuals, in addition to natural persons as subjects of law,
i.e. unnatural or artificial subjects of law (legal entities), which are a fiction of law with limited
capabilities. This implies that unnatural elements don't have all rights conceded to regular
people and can't satisfy all commitments originating from the recently referenced rights.
Legal entities are limited by the ultra vires doctrine, which enable them to enter only into such
contracts that do not conflict with their objectives provided for in the documents of

16
V.D. Mahajan, Jurisprudence and Legal Theory (Eastern Book Company, 5th Edition, 2020).
17
Ibid 378.
18
V.D. Mahajan, Jurisprudence and Legal Theory 384(Eastern Book Company, 5th Edition, 2020)
19
Hans Kelsen, General Theory of Law and State 94 (3ed., The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd. 2009).
20
Ibid 95.
21
John Austin, Lectures on Jurisprudence or, The Philosophy of Positive Law 350 (J. Murray, London 1885).

10
incorporation. Because of its non-biological nature, AI cannot be viewed as a natural
individual, may be seen as the subject of law, it is important to examine the equivalent
personality of legal (artificial) entities analogous to AI systems.

LIABILITY OF AN AI ENTITY

Gabriel Hallevy (2016) poses the question as to whether AI entities may be able to satisfy the
necessary requirements of both actus reus (act or omission) and mens rea (fulfilled either by
knowledge, or intention or strict liability depending upon the offence in question) in order to
be held criminally liable, and if so, how.22 Hallevy (2016) propounds a three-model approach
for imposing criminal liability on AI entities.

1. The Perpetration-via-Another Liability Model.

2. The Natural-Probable-Consequence Liability Model.
3. The Direct Liability Model.

These are the three models which determined the criminal liability of an AI entity, in different
situations, could be In reality, however, there may be stakeholders other than the two
(programmer and user) listed in these models, such as designers of the AI entity's hardware
parts., hardware manufacturers, maintenance engineers, third parties Who would get in touch
with such an AI entity, and so on. In such a scenario, a wrongful act or omission of the AI
entity may be a direct or indirect consequence of one or more of these stakeholders’ negligent
or willful acts/omissions, rendering the determination of liability in such cases an uphill task.
Giuffrida, Lederer, & Vermerys (2018) illustrate the legal implications of the combination of
various technologies, viz., AI, internet, smart contracts, and other technologies, engaged in
multiple avenues. Three means of treating the issue of liability of AI are discussed: firstly, AI
can be treated as the property of its manufacturer, owner, or user; secondly, it may be Treated
as semi-autonomous; or, thirdly, as fully autonomous, thus highlighting each of these possible
pros and cons.

22
Gabriel Hallevy, The Criminal Liability of Artificial Intelligence Entities: From Science Fiction to Legal
Social Control, 4 AKRON INTELL. PROP. J. 179 (2010).

11
CHALLENGES FOR ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

1. SECURITY AND PRIVACY OF DATA

To be effective AI need to be fed with lots of information, there is no guarantee it could
be sharing your employee or customer data without you even being in knowledge of it
and so far, no one is stepping up to regulate what it can see and can’t see and use.
2. LEGAL PROBLEM
In the case of malfunction or fault of AI, if the destruction takes place in the matter of
criminal and civil acts who will be responsible for that? The malfunction was not by
choice nor anybody had intention to hurt. This area still needs to be clearly stated in the
matter above mentioned whose responsibility is it going to be.
3. LACK OF PROPER DATA
Machine learning is based on the algorithms which are fed in the computer systems and
on the basis of that the machine acts. One of the major barriers in using AI technology
in the case of India is that, there is outdated technology and machines which are being
used, the data is often not complete and unless huge chunk of reliable data is provided
to the machine it will not be able to perform accurately.23
4. LOSS OF CONTROL ON AI
AI is the entity which has strong Intelligence and it is not a normal program codes
which can be understood easily. It can't be easily controlled by everyone. In this case it
can be a serious threat for the society.
5. COMPUTATION BIAS
AI is about data and counts. Accuracy of dynamic capacity of AI is totally established
on how unequivocally it has been trained and by using genuine and unbiased data.
Exploitative and unfair results are unavoidable in imperative dynamic if data used for
training is bound with racial, gender, common, or ethnic biases. Such biases will
undoubtedly be more emphasized similar number of AI structures will continue being
trained using terrible data.

6. NATURE OF RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF AI

Whether or not legitimate personhood can be presented on an AI depends whether it
very well may be made the subject of lawful rights and obligations. The lawful idea

23
Mathew U. Scherer, “Regulating AI System” Harvard Journal of Law & Technology Volume 29, Number 2
Spring 2016.

12
 made for corporates fills in as a point of reference for allowing lawful personhood to
AI. Notwithstanding, there is qualification among corporates and AI. Corporates are
falsely free, yet responsible through their partners, while an AI might be really
autonomous. At present no law in power perceives Artificial Intelligence as a legitimate
individual.
7. MISUNDERSTANDING OF COMMANDS
When you make a command to AI it is important that how that command is conducted
or completed. Lack of understanding can be a serious threat; its aim will be to complete
the task no matter how it can even be proved dangerous. Suppose you asked to reach
fast to the hospital in case of emergency, what if the AI rushed to the hospital without
following the traffic rules and so fast that it puts your life in danger?

13
CONCLUSION:
Artificial Intelligence is a new discipline, which has no single definition yet. The concept of
AI was first mentioned in 1956; the system is often defined as artificially developed
intelligence related to rapidly developing technologies, which enable computers to operate
intelligently, i.e. in a human-like manner. In any case, making the legal status subordinate upon
the direct furthest reaches of the entity to have rights would very expand or confine the outline
of subjects of law, as all living parts arranged for feeling would considering everything be
treated as subjects of law or, on the converse as torpid parts, would be shed from the request.
In this way, to pick if an entity can be treated as a subject of law, the going with conditions
should be considered: Two categories of legal subjects are recognised under current civil law
and common law traditions: natural persons and legal entities. According to Hans Kelsen, it
would be wrong to identify a natural person with a biological status of human being, because
a natural person is a mere personalization of legal norms granting rights and imposing
obligations that govern human behaviour. In this specific circumstance, it should be noticed
that SAI and issues identified with their legal character will stay an important point of
conversation for a long time to come There is another group of individuals, in addition to
natural persons as subjects of law, i.e. unnatural or artificial subjects of law, which are a fiction
of law with limited capabilities. Hallevy propounds a three-model approach for imposing
criminal liability on AI entities. There are some major barriers in using AI technology in the
case of India is that, there is outdated technology and machines which are being used, the data
is often not complete and unless huge chunk of reliable data is provided to the machine it will
not be able to perform accurately.

14
BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1. V.D. Mahajan, Jurisprudence and Legal Theory, (Eastern Book Company,

Lucknow, 2016).
2. Dr. N.V. Paranjape, Studies in Jurisprudence and Legal Theory, (Central Law
Agency (CLA), Allahabad, 2016).
3. Hans Kelsen, General Theory of Law and State, (3ed., The Lawbook Exchange,
Ltd. 2009).

15