dokumendiregister.ee
OtsingAsutusedMCP
dokumendiregister.eeAsutusedEesti avalike dokumendiregistrite otsing · nimistu.ee andmetel
Otsing›Justiits- ja Digiministeerium
Sissetulev kiriAvalik

Kiri

Justiits- ja Digiministeerium · 20. märts 2026
Viit
21-1/26/2172-1
Registreeritud
20. märts 2026
Dokumendi liik
Sissetulev kiri
Adressaat
Ministry of Justice of Finland
Saabumis/saatmisviis
e-post
Funktsioon
21 Digiarengu korraldamine
Sari
21-1 Digiriigi arengu kavandamise ning korraldamise kirjavahetus
Toimik
21-1/2026
Vastutaja
Eleri Kästik (Justiits- ja Digiministeerium, Kantsleri vastutusvaldkond, Õiguspoliitika valdkond, Õiguspoliitika osakond, Avaliku õiguse talitus)
Lahendamise tähtaeg
6. aprill 2026

Failid

  • 📎E-kiri.eml67 KB

Sisu (failidest)

Saatja: "Meritähti Maisa (OM)" <[email protected]> Saaja: [email protected], "Justiits- ja Digiministeerium" <[email protected]> Teema: Estonia's regulatory framework for ADM and AI within public authorities Kuupäev: 2026-03-20 07:25 Tähelepanu! Tegemist on välisvõrgust saabunud kirjaga. Tundmatu saatja korral palume linke ja faile mitte avada. Dear recipient, I am contacting you from the Finnish Ministry of Justice. I would be very grateful if you could point me toward the right person in your Ministry. We are currently conducting a preliminary study project on the use of AI in administrative procedure (information on the study available in Finnish <https://valtioneuvosto.fi/hanke?tunnus=OM063:00/2025> here). The aim is to determine the legal conditions for using AI at different stages of the procedure – from the initiation of a matter to the final decision. As part of this study, we are carrying out a brief comparative legal analysis on the regulation of AI in administrative procedures in various European countries, including Estonia. We have taken note of your <https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main/mount/docList/d5f01f2e-07bb-47f7-9536-564c7c136b2b#KHIqFcM7> legislative proposal on enabling automated decision-making (ADM) within public authorities and would like to ask a few questions. * According to the proposal, the new legislation would be technology neutral. Algorithms may make discretionary decisions if the discretionary factors are predetermined by standardized rules. The number of options must be limited, and the system then selects the appropriate solution according to its internal logic. * Does this mean that the proposal would not permit the use of more autonomous AI (i.e., more advanced than rule‑based AI and within the scope of the AI act) in administrative procedures? * How would you define "technology-neutrality" in the context of the proposal? * Would the scope of the proposed regulation apply only to the use of automated decision‑making for the final formal administrative decision? * If so, would the use of more advanced AI be permitted in other stages of the administrative procedure, such as the initiation of a matter? * Additionally, we would be interested to hear whether, in the context of the project, you have considered the legal conditions for the use of more autonomous AI, and whether any related preliminary work is currently underway. Thank you very much in advance for your time and assistance. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you require any further information. Best regards, Maisa Meritähti Specialist Department for Democracy and Public Law Ministry of Justice of Finland Email: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] Tel. +358 295150159 <http://www.oikeusministerio.fi/> www.oikeusministerio.fi PL 23 | 00023 Valtioneuvosto <https://valtioneuvosto.fi/> valtioneuvosto.fi
Allikas: Justiits- ja Digiministeerium dokumendiregister →