Search

The last decade has seen a rapid advancement in the fields of artificial intelligence (AI) and automation, with terms such as machine learning, deep learning and algorithms finding their way into everyday conversations. The usage of AI is evergrowing and present in many areas of life such as health care, financial services, and social media interactions. One subject which has garnered a significant amount of attention is the introduction of autonomous vehicles (AVs) and their promise of a safer and more efficient global traffic environment. However, while self-driving technology is developing at an exponential rate, associated laws and regulations are falling behind. The legal issues connected to AVs tend to differ from one jurisdiction to another, but a concern shared among most is the uncertain state of the legal landscape with respect to criminal liability. This study is focused on critically evaluating this uncertain legal landscape from a Swedish perspective. The method used in this thesis is a blend of legal dogmatics and legal analytics. A specific branch of legal analytics, legal informatics, is largely applied due to its suitability in analyzing the relationship between law and information technology. After a brief introduction to AI and AVs, the investigation begins by examining current law to determine how a general implementation of AVs would be handled by existing regulation. The thesis then continues to analyze the potential effects of the European proposal of an electronic legal personhood for AI and its associated ethical considerations. Lastly, the paper explores the Swedish proposal for a specialized AV regulation in comparison to current Swedish and international law. The conclusion of this study is that certain traffic scenarios tend to make the criminal liability assessment clearer than others. A human driver will generally not be held responsible if a vehicle driven by an automated driving system causes an incident. In most cases, the liability will be attributed to the vehicle’s owner or manufacturer. The most interesting and complex situations involve AVs with a lower level of autonomy. These vehicles require human assistance and oversight, leading to intricate questions about culpability and causality. However, the lack of existing specialized law and the unsettled nature of the proposed regulation means that any conclusions drawn regarding criminal liability and AVs are, to some extent, uncertain and hypothetical, emphasizing the need of a globally harmonized legal landscape.