- Research Article
- 10.24144/2307-3322.2025.92.3.37
Artificial intelligence and biometric data in the criminal procedure of Ukraine: admissibility, risks, and judicial oversight
- Jan 23, 2026
- Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law
- O M Mashtaliar
The article examines the implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies for processing biometric data in Ukraine’s criminal proceedings. Emphasis is placed on the potential of AI use for identifying individuals by fingerprints, facial features, voice, and other biometric characteristics, which can enhance the efficiency of investigations and evidence gathering. At the same time, a number of risks are outlined: possible algorithm errors and false matches that could lead to unjustified suspicions or arrests; the issue of reliability and transparency of AI “black box” models, whereby parties in a trial cannot verify how a result was obtained; and privacy threats associated with the mass collection and use of sensitive personal (biometric) data without sufficient legal safeguards. It is determined that current Ukrainian legislation lacks clear provisions on the admissibility of evidence obtained through AI, in particular results of automated facial recognition or other biometric identifications. The need for improving the regulatory framework is substantiated: defining the procedural status of data generated by AI; introducing criteria for verifying their accuracy (through expert assessment, validation of methods, etc.); as well as establishing special procedures for judicial oversight over the use of such technologies at the pre-trial investigation and trial stages. Examples of foreign experience are provided: in some cases U.S. courts have admitted AI-driven analyses (e.g., DNA expert reports) as evidence, whereas other rulings have excluded evidence obtained via facial recognition technologies due to concerns about their reliability and the lack of disclosure of the AI methods. At the European level, a cautious approach is observed: the European Parliament advocates significant restrictions on the use of mass biometric surveillance systems, allowing them only in exceptional situations subject to a court order. It is highlighted that the introduction of AI into criminal justice practice must be accompanied by not only technical, but also legal and ethical safeguards. The conclusion is drawn that a comprehensive approach is required to balance the innovative capabilities of AI with human rights protections – from amending the Criminal Procedure Code to record and evaluate AI-derived evidence to taking into account international standards (GDPR, the EU AI Act) and creating mechanisms of independent oversight. Proper judicial control and tailored legal regulation will minimize risks and ensure the admissibility and objectivity of using AI-processed biometric data in criminal proceedings.
Read more