Appendix D: Principles
Table 27: Examples of justice-focused AI principles across Australia and internationally
|
Jurisdiction |
Justice focused AI principles |
|---|---|
|
Australia (Victoria) Victoria Police Artificial Intelligence Ethics Framework[1] |
Human rights Community benefit Fairness Privacy and security Transparency Accountability Human oversight Skills and knowledge |
|
Australia and New Zealand Australia New Zealand Policing Advisory Agency Police Artificial Intelligence Principles[2] |
Transparency Human oversight Proportionality and justifiability Explainability Fairness Reliability Accountability Skills and knowledge Privacy and security |
|
Canada Interim Principles and Guidelines on the Court’s Use of Artificial Intelligence[3] |
Accountability Accuracy Cybersecurity “Human in the loop” Non-discrimination Respect of fundamental rights Transparency |
|
European Union European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Systems and their Environment[4] |
Respect for fundamental rights Non-discrimination Quality and security Transparency, impartiality and fairness “Under user control” |
|
Scotland Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service: Our Approach to the Development of Services Using Artificial Intelligence[5] |
Public good Safety and security Transparency and accountability Privacy and data protection Equality and fairness Control and empowerment Accountability |
|
South Korea Guidelines on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in the Judiciary[6] |
Guaranteeing fundamental rights and constitutional values Reliability Legality Responsibility Transparency Future orientation |
|
Spain Policy on the use of AI in the Administration of Justice[7] |
Respect for fundamental rights Non-discrimination Quality and security Transparency, impartiality and fairness “Under user control” Equity and universal access Prevention of bias and discrimination Privacy and personal data protection Responsible innovation and continuous evaluation Training Co-governance |
|
UNESCO Draft UNESCO Guidelines for the Use of AI Systems in Courts and Tribunals[8] |
Protection of human rights Proportionality Feasibility of benefits Safety Information security Accuracy and reliability Explainability Auditability Transparent and open justice Awareness and informed use Responsibility Accountability and contestability Human oversight and decision making Human-centric and participatory design Multi-stakeholder governance and collaboration |
|
United States (Connecticut) Artificial Intelligence Responsible Use Framework[9] |
Purposeful Accuracy Privacy Equity and fairness Transparency Understandable Accountability Adaptability Aligned to standards Human enhancing Safety and security |
Table 28: Examples of broad AI principles across Australia and internationally
|
Jurisdiction |
Broad AI principles |
|---|---|
|
Australia Australia’s AI Ethics Principles[10] |
Human, societal and environmental wellbeing Human-centred values Fairness Privacy protection and security Reliability and safety Transparency and explainability Contestability Accountability |
|
Australia (New South Wales) Artificial Intelligence Assurance Framework[11] |
Community benefit Fairness Privacy and security Transparency Accountability |
|
Brazil National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence (EBIA)[12] |
Inclusive growth Sustainable development and wellbeing Human-centred values and fairness Transparency and explainability Robustness, security and safety Accountability |
|
Canada Voluntary Code of Conduct on the Responsible Development and Management of Advanced Generative AI System[13] |
Accountability Safety Fairness and equity Transparency Human oversight and monitoring Validity and robustness |
|
Council of Europe Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law[14] |
Human dignity and individual autonomy Transparency and oversight Accountability and responsibility Equality and non-discrimination Privacy and personal data protection Reliability Safe innovation, fostering innovation while avoiding adverse impacts on human rights, democracy and the rule of law |
|
EU Ethics guidelines, European Commission[15] (referred to by EU AI Act[16]) |
Human agency and oversight Technical robustness and safety Privacy and data governance Transparency Diversity, non-discrimination and fairness Societal and environmental wellbeing Accountability |
|
Japan Act on the Promotion of Research and Development and the Utilization of AI-Related Technologies[17] |
Alignment Promotion Comprehensive advancement Transparency International leadership |
|
New Zealand Trustworthy AI in Aotearoa – AI Principles[18] |
Fairness and justice Reliability, security and privacy Transparency Human oversight and accountability Wellbeing |
|
OECD Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence[19] |
Inclusive growth, sustainable development and wellbeing Respect for rule of law, human rights and democratic values, including fairness and privacy Transparency and explainability Robustness, security and safety Accountability The principles have informed other guidance for example Scotland’s AI Strategy.[20] Over 47 countries are adherents to the OECDS’s principles on AI.[21] |
|
Singapore AI Verify Testing Framework: For Traditional and Generative AI.[22] |
Transparency Explainability Repeatability/reproducibility Safety Security Robustness Fairness Data governance Accountability Human agency and oversight Inclusive growth, societal and environmental wellbeing |
|
South Korea National Guidelines for AI Ethics[23] |
Basic principles: Respect for human dignity Common good of society Proper use of technology Key requirements: Safeguarding human rights Protection of privacy Respect for diversity Public good Solidarity Data management Accountability Safety Transparency |
|
United Kingdom A Pro-Innovation Approach to AI Regulation[24] |
Safety, security and robustness Appropriate transparency and explainability Fairness Accountability and governance Contestability and redress |
|
UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence[25] |
Proportionality and do no harm Safety and security Fairness and non-discrimination Sustainability Right to privacy and data protection Human oversight and determination Transparency and explainability Responsibility and accountability Awareness and literacy Multi-stakeholder and adaptive governance and collaboration |
-
Victoria Police, Victoria Police Artificial Intelligence Ethics Framework (Policy, 20 March 2024) <https://www.police.vic.gov.au/victoria-police-artificial-intelligence-ethics-framework>.
-
Australia New Zealand Policing Advisory Agency (ANZPAA), Australia New Zealand Police Artificial Intelligence Principles (Report, 14 July 2023) <https://www.anzpaa.org.au/resources/publications/australia-new-zealand-police-artificial-intelligence-principles>.
-
‘Interim Principles and Guidelines on the Court’s Use of Artificial Intelligence’, Federal Court of Canada (Guidelines, 20 December 2023) 2 <https://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/en/pages/law-and-practice/artificial-intelligence>.
-
European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ), European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Systems and Their Environment (2019, adopted at the 31st plenary meeting of the CEPEJ, Strasbourg, 3-4 December 2018) 7.
-
Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service, Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service: Our Approach to the Development of Services Using Artificial Intelligence (Policy, April 2025) 2–3 <https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/media/xalno3ff/scts-ai-policy.pdf>.
-
Bae Kim & Lee LLC et al, ‘Announcement of Guidelines on Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judiciary’, Lexology (Web Page, 19 March 2025) <https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=3de965db-8c9c-4938-af8c-5e4bc09c02dc>.
-
Minister of the Presidency, Justice and Relations with the Courts (Spain), Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in the Administration of Justice (Policy, 2024) 4–5 <https://www.mjusticia.gob.es/es/JusticiaEspana/ProyectosTransformacionJusticia/Documents/Spains_Policy_on_the_use_of_AI_in_the_Justice_Administration.pdf>.
-
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Draft Guidelines for the Use of AI Systems in Courts and Tribunals (Guidelines, May 2025) 13–16 <https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000393682>.
-
State of Connecticut Judicial Branch, Artificial Intelligence Responsible Use Framework (JBAPPM Policy 1013, 1 February 2024).
-
‘Australia’s AI Ethics Principles’, Department of Industry, Science and Resources (Web Page, 11 October 2024) <https://www.industry.gov.au/publications/australias-artificial-intelligence-ethics-principles/australias-ai-ethics-principles>.
-
Digital NSW, NSW Artificial Intelligence Assurance Framework (Updated) (Guidance, 2024) <https://www.digital.nsw.gov.au/policy/artificial-intelligence/nsw-artificial-intelligence-assessment-framework>.
-
Ministry of Science, Technology, and Innovations (MCTI), ‘Brazilian AI Strategy’, OECD.AI Policy Observatory (Web Page, 15 July 2021) <https://oecd.ai/en/wonk/documents/brazil-brazilian-ai-strategy-2021>; We note in Chapter 4 that Brazil has new AI legislation PL 2338/2023 [Bill No. 2338, of 2023] (Brazil) We note that this legislation would replace this list with twelve principles, adding principles such as self-determination; human participation and supervision; justice, equity and inclusion due process, prevention and mitigation of systemic risks and proportionality.
-
‘Voluntary Code of Conduct on the Responsible Development and Management of Advanced Generative AI Systems’, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (Web Page, September 2023) <https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/ised/en/voluntary-code-conduct-responsible-development-and-management-advanced-generative-ai-systems>.
-
Council of Europe, Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law opened for signature 5 September 2024, CETS No. 225, 4–5 <https://www.coe.int/en/web/artificial-intelligence/the-framework-convention-on-artificial-intelligence>.
-
High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence (AI HLEG), Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI: Shaping Europe’s Digital Future (Guidelines, European Commission, 8 April 2019) 14 <https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/ethics-guidelines-trustworthy-ai>.
-
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (Artificial Intelligence Act) [2024] OJ L 2024/1689, recital 27.
-
Dominic Paulger, ‘Understanding Japan’s AI Promotion Act: An “Innovation-First” Blueprint for AI Regulation’, Future of Privacy Forum (Web Page, 5 July 2025) <https://fpf.org/blog/understanding-japans-ai-promotion-act-an-innovation-first-blueprint-for-ai-regulation/>; Jinkou Chinou Kanren Gijutsu No Kenkyuu Kaihatsu Oyobi Katsuyou No Suishin Nikansuru Houritsu [Act on Promotion of Research and Development and Utilization of Artificial Intelligence-Related Technologies (English Translation)] Act No. 53 of 2025 (Japan).
-
AI Forum New Zealand, Trustworthy AI in Aotearoa: AI Principles (Report, March 2020) 4 <https://aiforum.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Trustworthy-AI-in-Aotearoa-March-2020.pdf>.
-
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence, OECD/LEGAL/0449, 3 May 2024, 8–9 <https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0449>.
-
Digital Scotland, Scotland’s Artificial Intelligence Strategy: Trustworthy, Ethical and Inclusive
-
‘OECD AI Principles Overview’, OECD Policy Observatory (Web Page, 2025) <https://oecd.ai/en/principles>; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Updates AI Principles to Stay Abreast of Rapid Technological Developments (Press Release, 3 May 2024) <https://www.oecd.org/en/about/news/press-releases/2024/05/oecd-updates-ai-principles-to-stay-abreast-of-rapid-technological-developments.html>.
-
AI Verify Foundation, AI Verify Testing Framework: For Traditional and Generative AI (Report, AI Verify) 2 <https://file.go.gov.sg/aivtf-pdf.pdf> Note: AI Verify is a not-for profit foundation, which sits under the Infocomm Media Development Authority of Singapore.
-
Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT) and Korea Information Society Development Institute, ‘The National Guidelines for AI Ethics’, AI Ethics Communications Channel (Web Page, 23 December 2020) <https://ai.kisdi.re.kr/eng/main/contents.do?menuNo=500011>.
-
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (UK) and Office for Artificial Intelligence (UK), A Pro-Innovation Approach to AI Regulation (Policy Paper No CP 815, March 2023) 6.
-
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence (2022, adopted on 23 Nov 2021) 20–23 <https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000381137>.
 |