Instituto de Estudios Políticos y Derecho Público "Dr. Humberto J. La Roche"
de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas de la Universidad del Zulia
Maracaibo, Venezuela
Esta publicación cientíca en formato digital es continuidad de la revista impresa
ISSN-Versión Impresa 0798-1406 / ISSN-Versión on line 2542-3185Depósito legal pp
197402ZU34
ppi 201502ZU4645
Vol.40 N° 72
Enero
Junio
2022
Recibido el 15/11/2021 Aceptado el 04/01/2022
ISSN 0798- 1406 ~ De pó si to le gal pp 198502ZU132
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas
La re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas, es una pu bli ca ción aus pi cia da por el Ins ti tu to
de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co “Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che” (IEPDP) de la Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas de la Uni ver si dad del Zu lia.
En tre sus ob je ti vos fi gu ran: con tri buir con el pro gre so cien tí fi co de las Cien cias
Hu ma nas y So cia les, a tra vés de la di vul ga ción de los re sul ta dos lo gra dos por sus in ves-
ti ga do res; es ti mu lar la in ves ti ga ción en es tas áreas del sa ber; y pro pi ciar la pre sen ta-
ción, dis cu sión y con fron ta ción de las ideas y avan ces cien tí fi cos con com pro mi so so cial.
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas apa re ce dos ve ces al año y pu bli ca tra ba jos ori gi na les con
avan ces o re sul ta dos de in ves ti ga ción en las áreas de Cien cia Po lí ti ca y De re cho Pú bli-
co, los cua les son so me ti dos a la con si de ra ción de ár bi tros ca li fi ca dos.
ESTA PU BLI CA CIÓN APA RE CE RE SE ÑA DA, EN TRE OTROS ÍN DI CES, EN
:
Re vicyhLUZ, In ter na tio nal Po li ti cal Scien ce Abs tracts, Re vis ta In ter ame ri ca na de
Bi blio gra fía, en el Cen tro La ti no ame ri ca no para el De sa rrol lo (CLAD), en Bi blio-
gra fía So cio Eco nó mi ca de Ve ne zue la de RE DIN SE, In ter na tio nal Bi blio graphy of
Po li ti cal Scien ce, Re vencyt, His pa nic Ame ri can Pe rio di cals In dex/HAPI), Ul ri ch’s
Pe rio di cals Di rec tory, EBS CO. Se en cuen tra acre di ta da al Re gis tro de Pu bli ca cio-
nes Cien tí fi cas y Tec no ló gi cas Ve ne zo la nas del FO NA CIT, La tin dex.
Di rec to ra
L
OIRALITH
M. C
HIRINOS
P
ORTILLO
Co mi té Edi tor
Eduviges Morales Villalobos
Fabiola Tavares Duarte
Ma ría Eu ge nia Soto Hernández
Nila Leal González
Carmen Pérez Baralt
Co mi té Ase sor
Pedro Bracho Grand
J. M. Del ga do Ocan do
José Ce rra da
Ri car do Com bel las
An gel Lom bar di
Die ter Nohlen
Al fre do Ra mos Ji mé nez
Go ran Ther born
Frie drich Welsch
Asis ten tes Ad mi nis tra ti vos
Joan López Urdaneta y Nil da Ma rín
Re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas. Av. Gua ji ra. Uni ver si dad del Zu lia. Nú cleo Hu ma nís ti co. Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas. Ins ti tu to de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co
“Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che”. Ma ra cai bo, Ve ne zue la. E- mail: cues tio nes po li ti cas@gmail.
com ~ loi chi ri nos por til lo@gmail.com. Te le fax: 58- 0261- 4127018.
Vol. 40, Nº 72 (2022), 145-163
IEPDP-Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas - LUZ
Activities of Law Enforcement Agencies
in the Context of the Introduction of
Innovative Technologies (Comparative
Legal Aspect)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.4072.08
Valentyn S. Tulinov *
Iryna V. Bilykh **
Olga M. Merdova ***
Olena O. Volobuieva ****
Mykola Y. Veselov *****
Abstract
The objective of the study was to determine the legal mechanisms
for the use of innovative technologies in law enforcement and to
outline the main problems of their implementation in the ght
against crime. The methodological scheme of the article was the
use of theoretical and empirical research methods, as well as comparative,
structural and logical methods, documentary, and systems analysis. It
is established that the main types of modern technologies used in law
enforcement are unmanned aerial vehicles, articial intelligence, robotics,
biotechnology, analytical and geographic information systems, explosion
locators and chatbots. The problems of introducing innovative technologies
into law enforcement were found to be objective and subjective. The ways
of overcoming them are oered through the creation of legal mechanisms
for the legal use of various modern technologies by law enforcement agents.
It is concluded that eective mechanisms for the use of innovations in law
enforcement will increase the eectiveness of crime prevention and enable
law enforcement ocials to avoid conicts related to violations of citizens’
rights and the protection of national security.
* PhD in Law, Dean of the Faculty no. 2, Donetsk State University of Internal Aairs, 87554, Mariupol,
Ukraine. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3972-348X
** Adjunct, Odesa State University of Internal Aairs, 65014, Odesa, Ukraine. ORCID ID: https://orcid.
org/0000-0001-7086-9551
*** PhD in Law, Head of the Department of Administrative and Legal Disciplines, Faculty no. 2, Donetsk
State University of Internal Aairs, 87554, Mariupol, Ukraine. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-
0003-0769-2364
**** PhD in Law, Dean of the Faculty no. 1, Donetsk State University of Internal Aairs, 87554, Mariupol,
Ukraine. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8601-4344
***** Doctor of Law, Professor at the Department of State and Legal Disciplines, Faculty no. 2, Kryvyi Rih
Educational and Scientic Institute of Donetsk State University of Internal Aairs, 50065, Kryvyi Rih,
Ukraine. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3963-2764
146
Valentyn S. Tulinov, Iryna V. Bilykh, Olga M. Merdova, Olena O. Volobuieva y Mykola Y. Veselov
Activities of Law Enforcement Agencies in the Context of the Introduction of Innovative
Technologies (Comparative Legal Aspect)
Keywords: innovative technologies; law enforcement; implementation
and innovations; modern technologies; postmodern
legislation.
Actividades de los organismos encargados de hacer
cumplir la ley en el contexto de la introducción de
tecnologías innovadoras (aspecto jurídico comparado)
Resumen
El objetivo del estudio fue determinar los mecanismos legales para
el uso de tecnologías innovadoras en la aplicación de la ley y esbozar
los principales problemas de su implementación en la lucha contra la
delincuencia. El esquema metodológico del artículo fue el uso de métodos
de investigación teóricos y empíricos, así como métodos comparativos,
estructurales y lógicos, documentales y análisis de sistemas. Se establece
que los principales tipos de tecnologías modernas utilizadas en la aplicación
de la ley son: vehículos aéreos no tripulados, inteligencia articial, robótica,
biotecnología, sistemas de información analítica y de información geográca,
localizadores de explosiones y chatbots. Se encontró que los problemas de
introducir tecnologías innovadoras en la aplicación de la ley son objetivos
y subjetivos. Se ofrecen las formas de su superación mediante la creación
de mecanismos legales para el uso legal de diversas tecnologías modernas
por parte de los agentes del orden. Se concluye que los mecanismos
ecaces para el uso de las innovaciones en materia de aplicación de la ley
aumentarán la ecacia de la prevención del delito y permitirán a los agentes
del orden evitar conictos relacionados con las violaciones de los derechos
de los ciudadanos y la protección de la seguridad nacional.
Palabras clave: tecnologías innovadoras; aplicación de la ley;
implementación e innovaciones; tecnologías modernas;
legislación posmoderna.
Introduction
Current trends of globalisation intensify international competition in
the eld of innovative technologies. The state of innovation development
is the main competitive advantage of the country and determines its level
of competitiveness in the international arena. Only the United States,
the United Kingdom, Germany, France, and Singapore have achieved
signicant economic success through the transfer of innovative technologies
147
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 145-163
so far. Such realities of globalisation of modern technologies have caused
a technological gap between the most developed and underdeveloped
countries.
According to the report of the Global Innovation Index 2021 published
on September 21, 2021, by the World Intellectual Property Organization,
Switzerland, Sweden, USA and England are still the leaders of the innovation
rating for the last three years (World intellectual property organization,
2021). Korea has joined the top ve for the rst time. The geography of
global innovation, as the World Intellectual Property Organization noted,
is changing unevenly. A striking example is the dynamic innovation
development of the region of Southeast Asia, East Asia and Oceania over
the last decade, which is increasingly closing the gap with the unchanging
leaders of North America and Europe. As a result, ve countries from the
region have entered the top 15 economies this year: Korea (5), Singapore
(8), China (12), Japan (13) and Hong Kong, China (14).
At the international level, developing countries nd it extremely
dicult to compete with their innovation potential with middle-income
countries, which manage to catch up with more developed countries
in terms of innovation. However, such countries successfully increase
their innovation potential through international technology transfer,
development of technologically dynamic services that are in great demand
in the international market, which generally leads to a balance of innovation
systems in the world.
Technological criminogenic risks of crime are becoming increasingly
important every year. According to the 14th UN Congress on Crime
Prevention and Criminal Justice, there were several technological
criminogenic risks in 2020, namely:
• cryptocurrencies that have a high degree of anonymity of use, which
leads to unhindered terrorist nancing and money laundering.
• drug market created through DarkNet.
• illicit tracking in weapons and explosives through the
cryptocurrency market and DarkNet.
• human tracking through the use of modern communication
channels to nd victims and potential buyers of live goods.
• abuse and exploitation of children because of their uncontrolled
access to information technology.
• illegal movement of migrants due to the oenders’ use of technology
to study the routes of the border service (United Nations, 2018).
148
Valentyn S. Tulinov, Iryna V. Bilykh, Olga M. Merdova, Olena O. Volobuieva y Mykola Y. Veselov
Activities of Law Enforcement Agencies in the Context of the Introduction of Innovative
Technologies (Comparative Legal Aspect)
The Budapest Concept on Cybercrime was adopted to stop actions against
the integrity and accessibility of computer systems, networks and computer
data, as well as the abuse of such systems (Council of Europe, 2001). The
provisions of the Concept ensure an appropriate balance between the
interests of law enforcement agencies and respect for fundamental human
rights enshrined in international treaties. They include the Council of
Europe Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms of 1950, the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights of 1966, the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of
Individuals about Automatic Processing of Personal Data of 1981, the UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989, the ILO Worst Forms of
Child Labour Convention of 1999, and the Council of Europe Conventions
on Co-operation in Criminal Matters.
Thirty-ve participating countries have committed themselves to a
coherent policy to combat high-tech crime, as well as to create an appropriate
law enforcement agency to prevent cybercrime and provide it with modern
technical means to carry out its activities (Council of Europe, 2001).
However, the current level of innovative awareness of criminals and
their access to modern technologies far exceeds the capabilities of law
enforcement agencies. Therefore, increasing the eectiveness of law
enforcement agencies in preventing high-tech criminal acts requires a
wide implementation of modern developments in their activities, which
will hinder oenders to violate the rights of citizens and help to protect the
interests of national security.
Kolodyazhny (2020) studied innovative technologies through the prism
of law enforcement activities, the prism of modern challenges of criminal
law. Shevchuk (2020) the forensic scientist, examined the content and
concept of forensic innovations. Matusiak and King (2020) developed
the classication of modern policing technology. Hollywood et al. (2019)
revealed modern challenges and legal background for the application of
innovations in law enforcement. Shubenkova and Egorov (2020) analysed
legal and technical forms of development of the digital law and order.
Simran and Nikhil (2020) outlined the place and role of innovation in
cybercrime from the perspective of globalization. Soldatova (2013) studied
technological measures to prevent cybercrime.
Many scientic works deal with the introduction of modern technologies
in law enforcement activities and their legal enshrinement. Losavio et
al. (2018) explored the technical means of digitalising the evidence base
in forensics. Pramanik et al. (2017) analysed the intellectual bases for
criminal investigations. Mastrobuoni (2020) studied forensic information
technology. Matlala (2019) researched electronic and intelligent policing
systems. Cracknell (2017) studied unmanned aerial vehicles (drones).
149
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 145-163
Nemitz (2018), Cath (2018), and Pagallo (2018) reviewed articial
intelligence systems and their general capabilities. Lum et al. (2017)
analysed technologies and the resultant performance in law enforcement.
Hendrix et al. (2019) considered geographic information systems.
Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine the features of the use of
innovative technologies in combating crime and outline the main problems
of their implementation in law enforcement.
The aim of the study involved the following objectives:
• nd out the innovation policy of the leading countries and the
possibility of using special technologies in the activities of law
enforcement agencies.
• identify the main problems of introduction of innovative technologies
in law enforcement agencies and suggest ways to solve them.
1. Methods and materials
The validity and reliability of the obtained results was ensured by the use
of a set of general scientic (empirical and theoretical) and special methods
(comparative, structural-logical, documentary and system analysis) of
scientic knowledge.
Empirical knowledge provides the background for the theoretical
method. Drawing certain theoretical conclusions rst requires collecting
information, which is empirical. Based on the relevant data that are
empirical in nature, we processed them analytically and presented arranged
results in the form of a certain theory.
Observation and comparison were used in the article as a kind of
empirical research method. An empirical theoretical method was also used,
analysis and synthesis, as well as a logical approach. A partial method is also
applied, which refers to the theoretical methods of research, and consists in
the denition, description, and interpretation.
The main materials, international, regional, and national legal acts,
such as the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, the International Code
of Conduct on the Transfer of Technology, the Lisbon Strategy; plans,
strategies and programs Europe 2020, Europe 2030, Horizon 2020;
national legislation of European countries and the United States in
the eld of innovation and modern technologies. The information and
empirical background of the study was statistics of the World Intellectual
Property Organization, generalization of practical application of national
legislation in the elds of scientic and technological, innovation activities
and intellectual property, practical activities of law enforcement agencies,
reference books, publications in periodicals.
150
Valentyn S. Tulinov, Iryna V. Bilykh, Olga M. Merdova, Olena O. Volobuieva y Mykola Y. Veselov
Activities of Law Enforcement Agencies in the Context of the Introduction of Innovative
Technologies (Comparative Legal Aspect)
2. Results
The use of modern technologies in law enforcement agencies in the
member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development is regulated by law in the eld of law enforcement and in the
eld of development, creation, use of innovations, technology transfer and
intellectual property.
In order to ensure innovation, the development of high-tech industries
and the implementation of scientic and technical developments in
the United States, laws were passed governing the nancing of special
programmes and the use of market mechanisms for innovation in the
country, namely:
• National Science and Technology Policy, Organization and Priorities
Act of 1976, which determines the general provisions of national
policy in the eld of nanotechnology (Congress. gov., 2010).
• The Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980, which
enshrines a basic approach to the place of technology and industrial
innovation in the US economy (Congress. gov., 2000).
• The Bayh-Dole Act or the Patent and Trademark Law Amendments
Act, concerning the protection of intellectual property rights,
which is the result of research funded by the federal government.
This law gives the right to universities, small businesses, and non-
prot organizations to patent their results of inventive activity and
commercialise them (Govtrack, 2008).
• The Small Business Innovation Development Act of 1982, which
introduces a rule that requires federal agencies to allocate certain
funds for research (Congress. gov., 2006).
• The National Innovation Act (2005).
• The National Competitiveness Investment Act (2006).
To ensure the eective functioning of scientic and technological,
innovative, and intellectual activities, the US government establishes a
number of government scientic and technological programmes (Small
Business Innovation Research Programme (SBIR), Small Business
Technology Transfer Programme (STTR), US Innovation Partnership
Initiative).
As in the United States, the EU is creating legal mechanisms to build
an innovative environment that establishes a dierentiated system of tax
benets and provides soft loans. In shaping the national innovation policy
of the EU, the determinants are the rules of the EU common policy related
to macroeconomic regulation, norms of economic, social, and regional
151
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 145-163
development, as well as measures to support science, technology and
innovation through research framework programmes that establish basic
conditions for innovation.
Regulatory and legal support of innovation in the European Union
consists of regional strategies, framework programmes and national
specialised legislation of its member countries (Table 1). To stimulate
innovation, the EU approves strategies every decade: the Lisbon Strategy
(2000-2010) (European Parliament, 2010), Europe 2020 (2010-2020)
(European Commission, 2019a), Europe 2030 (2020-2030) (European
Commission, 2019b), which include areas of innovation for the needs of
public protection and law enforcement. In order to full the objectives of
Europe 2020, a new framework programme for scientic and innovative
research — Horizon 2020 — was adopted (European Commission, 2020a).
One of its priorities is social challenges, which focuses on research
and innovation programmes for law enforcement, in particular: Justice
Programme and Hercule III. Table 1 presents the innovation policy of some
EU countries.
Table 1. Innovation policy of foreign countries
Country Regulatory support Institutional structure Funding
Austria Laws “On the
Promotion of Scientic
Development” (1967);
“On Universities” (2002)
National Council for
Research and Technology
Development; National
Fund for Research,
Technology and
Development, Innovation
Funds
2.5 % GDP
Belgium Government of
Belgium, Scientic and
Technological Research
& Development Program,
EUREKA
1.9 % GDP
Denmark Laws “On Technology
and Innovation”
(2002), “On Inventions
in Public Research
Institutions” (1999), “On
Technology Transfer
in Public Research
Institutions” (2004),
National Programme
for Innovation
Development, National
Development Strategy in
the Globalization
Government of
Denmark, Ministry of
Science, Technology
and Innovation, Danish
Agency for Science,
Technology and
Innovation, Supervisory
Boards, Technology
Service Institutes
152
Valentyn S. Tulinov, Iryna V. Bilykh, Olga M. Merdova, Olena O. Volobuieva y Mykola Y. Veselov
Activities of Law Enforcement Agencies in the Context of the Introduction of Innovative
Technologies (Comparative Legal Aspect)
Spain Law on Science (1986),
National Plan and
Programmes
Ministry of Science and
Innovation, General
Council for Science
and Technology,
Interministerial
Commission for Science
and Technology, National
Plan
1.2 GDP
Italy Law No. 42/82 on
the Promotion of
Industries of National
Importance (1982)
Ministry of Economic
Development of
Italy, Foundation for
Technological Innovation,
innovation structures,
technology parks or
science and technology
parks
Germany The High-tech Strategy Ministry of Education
and Research, Ministry
of Economy and
Technology, Expert
Commission on Research
and Innovation
2.5 % GDP
Finland National Innovation
Strategy Ministry of Education,
Ministry of Labour and
Economy, Research and
Innovation Council,
Foundations
3.5 GDP
Switzerland Federal Law “On
Measures to Overcome
the Crisis and Increase
Jobs” (1954), Resolution
of the Federal Council
“On Encouraging
the Development
of Technology and
Innovation” (1982)
State Secretariat for
Professional Education
and Technology, Federal
Department of Economics
Sweden Law “On Development
of Research and
Innovation”
Ministry of Employment
and Communications,
Ministry of Education
and Culture, Swedish
Innovation Systems
Development Agency,
National, regional,
sectoral programmes
3.7 GDP
Source: author’s development based on (Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2018).
Continuing our research, we classify the types of innovative technologies
implemented in the activities of law enforcement agencies (Figure 1).
153
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 145-163
Figure 1. Types of innovative technologies implemented in the
activities of law enforcement agencies
Source: author’s development based on (Kolodyazhny, 2020: 178; Matusiak and King, 2020).
Unmanned aerial vehicles (hereinafter — UAVs) (including drones,
quadcopters) are widely used in law enforcement. They allow law
enforcement ocers to perform the following ocial duties: patrolling and
surveillance of large areas; search and detection of people using a thermal
imager; control over the observance of order at mass events; monitoring
of the trac situation and analysis of the places of trac accidents;
coordination of actions of law enforcement ocers from air.
Despite the fact that the EU is a leader in the production and use of UAVs,
the EU has not adopted clear legal provisions establishing the rules of UAV
ight. A resolution adopted by the European Parliament in 2015, which
sets out general provisions on security and privacy when taking photos and
videos through UAVs, as well as mandatory equipment of drones with chips
with pilot registration data can be considered the only regulatory document
adopted in the EU on the use of UAVs.
As the EU, many countries do not have uniform standards for the use of
quadcopters and drones (Table 2).
154
Valentyn S. Tulinov, Iryna V. Bilykh, Olga M. Merdova, Olena O. Volobuieva y Mykola Y. Veselov
Activities of Law Enforcement Agencies in the Context of the Introduction of Innovative
Technologies (Comparative Legal Aspect)
Table 2. Terms of use of UAVs in dierent countries
Mandatory conditions for the use
of UAVs Countries
UAV ight rules are established by the
relevant civil aviation service or agency United States, Singapore, United King-
dom, Canada, Africa, Vietnam, Philip-
pines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Australia
UAV registration required USA, Russia
Restrictions on UAV weight and range USA, Singapore, United Kingdom, Ire-
land, Canada, Africa, Australia
Prohibition of shooting in large crowds Australia, Italy
Only an adult can be the owner of a
UAV Africa
Source: own elaboration.
Articial intelligence in the activities of law enforcement ocers allows
to solve more complex economic and social problems, but its use in ocial
activities requires the adoption of modern legislation in line with the
realities of globalisation and the competence of law enforcement ocers.
The EU was one of the rst international organizations to approve the
Resolution on a Civil Liability Regime for Articial Intelligence (2020/2014
(INL)) (European Parliament, 2020) and the White Paper on Articial
Intelligence (European Commission, 2020b: 10-19).
Paragraph 5 of the White Paper gave law enforcement agencies the
right to use appropriate articial intelligence tools to ensure the safety of
citizens, with due respect for their rights and freedoms. However, the use
of articial intelligence by law enforcement ocers is limited, it should not
violate the right to personal data protection in the framework of criminal
proceedings. Restrictions are provided for in paragraph 7 of the White
Paper and Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the
Council of Europe of 27 April 2016 on the protection of individuals with
regard to the processing of personal data by the competent authorities for
the prevention, investigation, detection or free movement of such data.
The current legal framework for the use of robotics in the eld of crime
prevention includes only the rules for the development of robotics. This is
Resolution 2015/2103 (INL) of the European Parliament of 16 February
2017 on the civil law regulation of robotics with recommendations for the
European Commission, which sets out general provisions for robotics and
the Multi-Annual Roadmap of Robotics 2020 for Horizon 2020 (European
Commission, 2020a). The provisions for the development of robotics were
adopted at the legislative level only in Asian countries: the Law on the
Development and Distribution of Intelligent Robots (South Korea), Japan’s
155
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 145-163
New Robot Strategy, Master Plan for Robotics (South Korea), China’s State
Development Programme, Robotics Industry Development Plan (China).
In the military sphere, the use of military robots is limited by the decision
of the UN meeting in 2013, which recommended that Member States impose
a national moratorium on military robots and ensure compliance with
international humanitarian law in all activities related to robotic weapons
systems. Besides, military robots are equated with inhumane weapons, the
creation and use of which is prohibited by the Convention on Prohibitions
or Restrictions of the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be
Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or Have Indiscriminate Eects.
The use of modern biotechnology in reducing the potential for crime is
limited by international law: European Parliament Resolution No. 327/88
on the Ethical and Legal Issues of Genetic Experiments; The Convention
for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being
with Regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine, the Convention
on Human Rights and Biomedicine and the Universal Declaration on the
Human Genome and Human Rights.
The use of information-analytical and geographical information systems
and chatbots in the ght against crime is based on information law. Using
these modern information technologies, law enforcement ocers undertake
to comply with the rules on the protection of personal data of individuals in
the automated processing of data provided for in Convention No. 108 of the
Council of Europe and Directives 95/46/EC and 97/66/EC. They should
also comply with the Convention of the International Telecommunication
Union, which establishes common standards and rules in the eld of
telecommunications.
The use of locators of explosive devices by law enforcement ocers
is based on compliance with the requirements of the International Mine
Action Standards, which establish common criteria for aspects of the
humanitarian demining. The provisions of the Ottawa Convention, which
obliges the destruction of stockpiles of antipersonnel mines and imposes a
moratorium on their accumulation, production and transfer should also be
complied with. It is also required to comply with international norms on
counter-terrorism — the International Convention for the Suppression of
Terrorist Bombing, the Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International
Terrorism, the Convention on the Marking of Plastic Explosives for
Detection, and the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism.
However, the introduction of such innovations in the ght against
crime is extremely important, as it is associated with the applied function
of law enforcement, moreover many modern technologies have not been
implemented in practice. The reasons were dierent, both objective and
subjective (Figure 2).
156
Valentyn S. Tulinov, Iryna V. Bilykh, Olga M. Merdova, Olena O. Volobuieva y Mykola Y. Veselov
Activities of Law Enforcement Agencies in the Context of the Introduction of Innovative
Technologies (Comparative Legal Aspect)
Subjective reasons for ignoring the introduction of innovative
technologies in the activities of law enforcement agencies are related to the
lack of interest of individual entities in innovation and, accordingly, in the
acquisition of special knowledge for their application. Objective reasons
are related to the unjustied refusal to apply new scientic and technical
knowledge and research methods.
To overcome them, it is considered appropriate to create legal
mechanisms for the lawful use by law enforcement ocers of various
modern technologies necessary for the performance of ocial duties, as well
as to conduct educational activities with law enforcement ocers regarding
the latest technical developments and resultant performance indicators.
Figure 2. Reasons for ignoring the introduction of innovative
technologies in the activities of law enforcement agencies
Source: author’s development based on (Shevchuk, 2020: 151-152).
4. Discussion
Improving the eectiveness of law enforcement activities to prevent
high-tech crimes requires the widespread introduction of modern
developments in their activities, which will hinder crime to violate the
rights of citizens and protect the interests of national security. The main
types of modern technologies used in law enforcement include unmanned
aerial vehicles, articial intelligence, robotics, modern biotechnology,
information-analytical and geographic information systems, localizers of
157
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 145-163
explosive devices; chatbots. This list is not exhaustive, it may change with
the development of scientic and technological progress and the challenges
of globalization.
The introduction of such law enforcement innovative technologies is
based on the provisions of international treaties (Conventions, Directives,
EU Resolutions) and the norms of national specialized legislation in the
elds of scientic and technical activities, innovative development, and
intellectual property. Their combination in each country determines the
level of the legal mechanism for the application of innovations in law
enforcement agencies.
Problems of introduction of modern innovative technologies in law
enforcement activity relate to imperfection of the legislation concerning
their use, insucient nancing of law enforcement agencies and low level
of knowledge of law enforcement ocers about innovations. According to
Mastrobuoni (2020) and Hendrix et al. (2019), the need for introducing
innovative technologies in criminology is due to the progressiveness of
criminals compared to law enforcement ocers in terms of the ability
and scope of application of modern technology to commit various
criminal oenses. After all, the traditional methods of policing, as Matlala
(2019) noted, will not reduce crime by themselves. The use of innovative
technologies, in particular information-analytical systems, as Akhmetov
et al. (2018) noted, has a dierent meaning at each stage of criminal
proceedings.
Shubenkova and Egorov (2020) emphasize that modern law-making
and law enforcement agencies cannot eectively perform their functions
without the adoption of legislative regulators aimed at regulating public
relations in the digital environment. Wei-Jung (2020) emphasizes that the
use of modern technologies by law enforcement ocers without their proper
jurisdiction is impossible. Pagallo (2018) criticizes the European policy on
the ambiguity of determining the legal status of robotics, which leads to
dierent interpretations in economic, civil, and criminal law relations.
According to Cracknell (2017), uneven legal application of innovative
technologies in dierent countries, in particular UAVs, depends on the
purpose of their use: commercial activities, ocial duties, research,
environmental monitoring, crime detection. Hollywood et al. (2019) believe
that law enforcement innovation can be addressed through the concerted
collective eorts of the entire criminal justice community, including
stakeholders from local communities, social services and providers.
According to Rosser et al. (2017), eciency of use of information-
analytical systems is possible only through the creation of norms which
will clearly dene the legal status of information technologies. The process
of digitization of documents and regulation of data exchange processes
158
Valentyn S. Tulinov, Iryna V. Bilykh, Olga M. Merdova, Olena O. Volobuieva y Mykola Y. Veselov
Activities of Law Enforcement Agencies in the Context of the Introduction of Innovative
Technologies (Comparative Legal Aspect)
using electronic law enforcement systems, the procedure for access to
information, the administration of justice using the capabilities of articial
intelligence require legislative regulation (Rosser et al., 2017: 569-572).
According to Losavio et al. (2018), failure to resolve legal conicts in the
mechanisms of using modern information technology in the future will lead
to conicts related to police powers and guaranteed rights of citizens. The
scale of conicts will depend on the laws in each country (Losavio et al.,
2018).
Nemitz (2018) believes that the introduction of law enforcement
innovations, in particular articial intelligence requires adhering to the rule
of law, human rights and democratic principles. Supporting the position of
the scientist, Cath (2018) recommends to follow clear instructions when
using them in order to avoid personal conicts. Benton and Newhall (2016)
argue that the use of robotics is possible only through the introduction of
eective legal mechanisms for their operation.
Lum et al. (2017) divide the problems of introduction of modern
technologies in policing into technological and organisational, which are
revealed through traditional approaches to their ocial duties. Pramanik et
al. (2017) considers methodological imperfection of research to be the main
problem of innovation in law enforcement.
The legal scholars view the issue of eective measures to combat
cybercrime and training of future law enforcement ocers as another
important aspect in the implementation of innovations in law enforcement.
According to Soldatova (2013), high latency, lack of ocial statistics and
comprehensive research on cybercrime lead to the ineectiveness of
preventive measures, causing diculties in combating this type of crime.
Simran and Nikhil (2020) also believe that raising the level of knowledge of
modern technologies of law enforcement ocers will increase the security
of cyberspace.
As Soldatova (2013) noted, the low level of legal consciousness of
technical specialists in universities may lead in the future to committing
crimes by students in the eld of computer technology. Therefore, she
proposes to carry out preventive work with such students and teach not
only the introductory part of the basics of law, but also to provide in-depth
legal knowledge on cybercrime.
The implementation of innovations in the law enforcement largely
depends on the human factor, from ordinary employees to their managers.
Shevchuk (2020) proposes to single out such a task of criminology as
scientic support of introduction of innovative products, methods,
techniques and means developed by forensic science into practice.
According to most scientists, the problems of introducing innovative
technologies into law enforcement agencies are often associated with
159
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 145-163
methodological gaps that prevent the understanding and distinction
between innovations and modern technologies. Innovation for law
enforcement ocers is something new, which, although in demand in
practice, has not unfortunately found its eective practical application. As a
result of the doctrinal analysis of these problems, we can note that scientists
consider it reasonable to further research innovative technologies for law
enforcement agencies, providing eective recommendations for their
practical implementation, which would adjust the content and direction of
innovative development of law enforcement.
Conclusion
Legal systems of innovation in dierent countries of the world provide
an opportunity to develop their innovation policy in the conditions
provided by each country. As a result, the creation of innovations in each
country may dier from each other by dierent characteristics and have
dierent conditions of legal and practical use. And this signicantly aects
the innovation of law enforcement agencies in dierent countries. After
all, the uniform introduction of modern technologies in law enforcement
in each country of the world would help to counter high-tech criminal
manifestations in the world.
Innovative technologies for law enforcement agencies are the latest
or improved technologies that signicantly improve the eciency of
law enforcement agencies in the performance of their duties. Objective
problems of introduction of innovations in law enforcement are a low level
of knowledge of law enforcement ocers about innovations; legal conicts
of mechanisms of their law enforcement by law enforcement ocers;
insucient funding of law enforcement agencies. Subjective reasons
include ignoring innovations by the management and ordinary personnel,
and the need for special training.
The prospect of further research is to develop ways to implement
modern developments in law enforcement agencies and create eective
mechanisms for their implementation in the ght against crime. Therefore,
we see further prospects in the empirical study, as well as theoretical
and methodological justication of the eectiveness of law enforcement
agencies through the use of innovations and legal support for the practical
application of modern legal technologies.
160
Valentyn S. Tulinov, Iryna V. Bilykh, Olga M. Merdova, Olena O. Volobuieva y Mykola Y. Veselov
Activities of Law Enforcement Agencies in the Context of the Introduction of Innovative
Technologies (Comparative Legal Aspect)
Bibliographic References
AKHMETOV, Artem; BEKISHEVA, Svitlana; SYRBU, Anton; KAINAZAROVA,
Dana. 2018. “Retrospective review of information technologies in the
criminal code of Kazakhstan” In: Journal of Advanced Research in Law
and Economics. Vol. 5, No. 9, pp. 1545–1550.
BENTON, Martin; NEWHALL, Robert. 2016. Technology and the Guilty
Mind: When Do Technology Providers Become Criminal Accomplices?
Available online. In: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2393484. Consultation
date: 17/10/2021.
CATH, Corinne. 2018. “Governing articial intelligence: ethical, legal and
technical opportunities and challenges” In: Philosophical Transactions
of the royal society A. Vol.376, No. 2133, pp. 1-8.
CONGRESS. GOV. 2000. Stevenson–Wydler technology Innovation act of
1980. Available online. In: https://www.congress.gov/96/statute/
STATUTE-94/STATUTE-94-Pg2311.pdf. Consultation date: 11/10/2021.
CONGRESS. GOV. 2006. Small business innovation development act of
1982. Available online. In: https://www.congress.gov/97/statute/
STATUTE-96/STATUTE-96-Pg217.pdf. Consultation date: 15/10/2021.
CONGRESS. GOV. 2010. National Science and Technology policy, organization
and priorities act of 1976. Available online. In: https://www.govinfo.gov/
content/pkg/STATUTE-90/pdf/STATUTE-90-Pg459.pdf#page=14.
Consultation date: 14/10/2021.
COUNCIL OF EUROPE. 2001. Convention on Cybercrime. Available online. In:
https://rm.coe.int/1680081561. Consultation date: 18/10/2021.
CRACKNELL, Arthur. 2017. “Unmanned aerial vehicles for environmental
applications” In: International Journal of Remote Sensing. Vol. 38. No.
8-10, pp. 3054-3067.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION. 2019a. Europe 2020 Strategy. Available online.
In: https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/policy/what/glossary/e/
europe-2020-strategy. Consultation date: 17/10/2021.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION. 2019b. A Sustainable Europe by 2030. Available
online. In: https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/reection-paper-
towards-sustainable-europe-2030_en. Consultation date: 14/10/2021.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION. 2020a. Horizon 2020. Available online.
In: https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/home.
Consultation date: 19/10/2021.
161
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 145-163
EUROPEAN COMMISSION. 2020b. White Paper on Articial Intelligence
- A European approach to excellence and trust. Brussels, 19.02.2020.
Available online. In: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/les/
commission-white-paper-artificial-intelligence-feb2020_en.pdf.
Consultation date: 15/10/2021.
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT. 2010. The Lisbon Strategy 2000–2010. Available
online. In: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/document/activities/
cont/201107/20110718ATT24270/20110718ATT24270EN.pdf.
Consultation date: 16/10/2021.
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT. 2020. European Parliament resolution of 20
October 2020 with recommendations to the Commission on a civil
liability regime for articial intelligence (2020/2014(INL)). Available
online. In: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-
2020-0276_EN.html. Consultation date: 13/10/2021.
GOVTRACK. 2008. The Bayh–Dole Act or Patent and Trademark Law
Amendments Act. Pub. L. 96-517, December 12, 1980. Available online.
In: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/96/hr6933. Consultation
date: 17/10/2021.
HENDRIX, Joshua; TANIGUCHI, Travis; STROM, Kevin; AAGAARD, Brian;
JOHNSON, Nicole. 2019. “Strategic policing philosophy and the
acquisition of technology: ndings from a nationally representative
survey of law enforcement” In: Policing & Society. Vol. 6, No. 29, pp.
727-743.
HOLLYWOOD, John; GOODISON, Sean; WOODS, Dulani; VERMEER,
Michael; JACKSON, Brian. 2019. Fostering Innovation to Respond to
Top Challenges in Law Enforcement. Available online. In: https://www.
rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2930.html. Consultation date:
14/10/2021.
KOLODYAZHNY, Maxim. 2020. “Application of modern technologies in the
eld of crime prevention” In: Bulletin of the Association of Criminal Law
of Ukraine. Vol. 1, No. 13, pp. 178-195.
LOSAVIO, Michael; CHOW, Kyre; KOLTAY, Andras; JAMES, Joshua. 2018.
“The Internet of Things and the Smart City: Legal challenges with digital
forensics, privacy, and security” In: Special Issue: Security and Privacy.
Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 1-11.
LUM, Cynthia; KOPER, Christopher; WILLIS, James. 2017. “Understanding
the Limits of Technology’s Impact on Police Eectiveness” In: Police
Quarterly. Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 135–163.
162
Valentyn S. Tulinov, Iryna V. Bilykh, Olga M. Merdova, Olena O. Volobuieva y Mykola Y. Veselov
Activities of Law Enforcement Agencies in the Context of the Introduction of Innovative
Technologies (Comparative Legal Aspect)
MASTROBUONI, Giovanni. 2020. “Crime is Terribly Revealing: Information
Technology and Police Productivity” In: The Review of Economic
Studies. Vol. 87, No. 6, pp. 2727–2753.
MATLALA, Ramolobi. 2019. “Dening e-policing and smart policing for law
enforcement agencies in Gauteng Province” In: Acta Criminologica:
African Journal of Criminology & Victimology. Vol. 31, No. 1.
MATUSIAK, Matthew; KING, William. 2020. “Advancing the Study of Police
Innovation: Toward an Empirical Denition and Classication of
Contemporary Police Innovations” In: Crime & Delinquency. Vol. 12, No.
67, pp. 1982-2010.
NEMITZ, Paul. 2018. “Constitutional democracy and technology in the age of
articial intelligence” In: Philosophical Transactions of the royal society
A. Vol. 376, No. 2133, pp. 1-14.
PAGALLO, Ugo. 2018. “Apples, oranges, robots: four misunderstandings
in today’s debate on the legal status of AI systems” In: Philosophical
Transactions of the royal society A. Vol. 376, No. 2133, pp. 1-16.
PRAMANIK, Mik; LAU, Rik; YUE, Wet; YE, Yaw; LI, Cim. 2017. “Big
data analytics for security and criminal investigations” In: Wiley
Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery. Vol.
54, No. 7.
ROSSER, Gabriel; DAVIES, Toby; BOWERS, Kate; JOHNSON, Shane;
CHENG, Tao. 2017. “Predictive Crime Mapping: Arbitrary Grids or
Street Networks?” In: Journal оf Quantitative Criminology. Vol. 3, No.
33, pp. 569-594.
SHEVCHUK, Victor. 2020. “Innovative forensic products in law enforcement:
concepts, features and problems of implementation in practice” In:
Scientic works of the National University “Odessa Law Academy”. Vol.
26, pp. 139-155.
SHUBENKOVA, Katerina; EGOROV, Gregoriy. 2020. “Legal and Technical
Forms of Developing Digital Law-Enforcement in Modern Russia:
Problems and Prospects” In: Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems.
Vol. 111, pp. 705-711.
SIMRAN, Baheti; NIKHIL, Tiwari; RUSHIL, Parikh; PARITOSH, Dandekar;
RAJAT, Chandak; ABHIJEET, Raipurkar. 2020. “Challenges and
Innovations in Cybersecurity” In: Bioscience biotechnology research
communications. Vol. 14, pp. 227-230.
163
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 145-163
SOLDATOVA, Victoria. 2013. “Some measures to prevent and combat
cybercrime” In: Bulletin of the Criminological Association of Ukraine.
Vol. 3, pp. 145-155.
UNITED NATIONS. 2018. Discussion Guide for the Fourteenth United Nations
Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice. Available online. In:
https://www.unodc.org/documents/congress//Documentation_14th_
Congress/DiscussionGuide/A_CONF234_PM1_r_V1806331.pdf.
Consultation date: 13/10/2021.
VERKHOVNA RADA OF UKRAINE. 2018. Innovation policy of foreign
countries: concepts, strategies, priorities. Available online. In: http://
kno.rada.gov.ua/uploads/documents/36385.pdf. Consultation date:
17/10/2021.
WEI-JUNG, Ciro. 2020. “Cyberstalking and law enforcemen. Procedia Computer
Science” In: 24th KES International Conference on Knowledge-Based
and Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems. Vol. 176, pp. 1188
– 1194.
WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION. 2021. Global
Innovation Index: 14th Edition. Available online. In: https://www.wipo.
int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_gii_2021.pdf. Consultation date:
17/10/2021.
www.luz.edu.ve
www.serbi.luz.edu.ve
www.produccioncienticaluz.org
Esta revista fue editada en formato digital y publicada
en enero de 2022, por el Fondo Editorial Serbiluz,
Universidad del Zulia. Maracaibo-Venezuela
Vol.40 Nº 72
