Humanoid Interrogation in High-End Terrorism Cases: Innovations, Challenges, and Legal Admissibility
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15210149Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence Humanoids Counter-Terrorism Interrogation Legal Admissibility Data Analysis AI-Driven SystemsAbstract
This study examines the integration of humanoids based on artificial intelligence (AI) in high-end terrorism interrogations, focusing on their potential to enhance accuracy while mitigating human biases. Employing a mixed-methods approach, it analyzes legal frameworks, ethical considerations, and AI performance in simulated interrogations. Findings indicate while AI improves data processing, it presents ethical challenges, including privacy concerns and algorithmic biases. Legal quibbles regarding accountability and evidence admissibility necessitate regulatory updates. The study concludes that AI-assisted interrogations require comprehensive legal frameworks, stringent human oversight, and adherence to human rights standards to ensure ethical and legally sound applications in counter-terrorism policies.
References
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Anchor Books.
Buolamwini, J., & Gebru, T. (2018). Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 81, 1–15.
Calo, R. (2017). Artificial intelligence policy: A primer and roadmap. UC Davis Law Review, 51(2), 399–435.
Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 588–608. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094589
Floridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., Chatila, R., Chazerand, P., Dignum, V., Luetge, C., Madelin, R., Pagallo, U., Rossi, F., Schäfer, B., Valcke, P., & Vayena, E. (2018). AI4People—An ethical framework for a good AI society: Opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Minds and Machines, 28(4), 689–707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5
Kanda, T., Shiomi, M., Miyashita, Z., & Ishiguro, H. (2020). A communication robot in a shopping mall: An ethnographic study. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 36(2), 365–382. https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2020.2967424
Müller, V. C. (2021). Ethics of artificial intelligence and robotics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2021 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/ethics-ai/
Belfer Center. (2024). AI and security risks in counter-terrorism. https://www.belfercenter.org
Council on Criminal Justice. (2024). Forensic standards and AI-generated evidence: A legal perspective. https://counciloncj.org
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. (2021). Explainable AI (XAI) program overview. https://www.darpa.mil/program/explainable-artificial-intelligence
Digital Rights Foundation. (2025). Embedding human rights in AI policies for counter-terrorism in Pakistan. https://digitalrightsfoundation.pk
European Commission. (2021). Proposal for a regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act). https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu
Higher Education Commission. (2025). Legal framework for AI in law enforcement.
Lorch, P., Scheler, A., & Riess, L. (2022). The EU AI Act and its impact on criminal justice: Safeguarding fairness and non-discrimination.
National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2020). Four principles of explainable artificial intelligence (NISTIR 8312). https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8312
OUP Academic. (2023). Ethical implications of AI in law enforcement and intelligence gathering.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2023). Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. https://unesdoc.unesco.org
United Nations. (2022). Human rights considerations in biometric surveillance technologies.
Rigano, C. (2019). Using artificial intelligence to address criminal justice needs (NCJ 252713). National Institute of Justice. https://nij.ojp.gov/library/publications/using-artificial-intelligence-address-criminal-justice-needs
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2024). AI in criminal investigations and forensic analysis.
United Nations Security Council. (n.d.). Technology in counter-terrorism: Opportunities and risks.
Government of Pakistan. (1997). Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997.
Government of Pakistan. (1984). Qanoon-e-Shahadat Order, 1984.
U.S. Department of Defense. (2012). Directive 3000.09: Autonomy in weapon systems. https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodd/300009p.pdf
Binns, R., Veale, M., Van Kleek, M., & Shadbolt, N. (2018). “It's reducing a human being to a percentage”: Perceptions of justice in algorithmic decisions. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–14). https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173951
McKendrick, K. (2019). Artificial intelligence prediction and counterterrorism. Chatham House.
Princeton University. (2018). Ethical concerns in AI-driven interrogation systems.
Punjab Police. (2023). Face Trace System: AI in law enforcement. Punjab Police Official Report.
United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute. (n.d.). Artificial intelligence and robotics in counter-terrorism operations.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Munir Ahmad Zia Rao, Tahreem Munir
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.