- Panel: “The ‘Cookbook’ for Responsible AI in Policing and Criminal Justice” – PS A.9
- High-Risk systems – PS B.9
- DS Special Track Session: Legitimacy in Algorithmic Mediation – PS C.9
- Urban Governance – PS D.9
05/08/2026
Session A9 (Auditorium):
Panel: “The ‘Cookbook’ for Responsible AI in Policing and Criminal Justice.” (Submission #44)
- Dr Temitope Lawal, Research Fellow in Law, PROBabLE Futures, Northumbria University
- Lewis Lincoln-Gordon, Interim Deputy Director, Police AI and T/Chief Superintendent
- Dr Michele Sevegnani – PROBabLE Futures Co-Lead, Reader in Computing Science Glasgow University
- Dr Mackenzie Jorgensen, Research Fellow in Computer Science, PROBabLE Futures, Northumbria University
- Professor Claire Paterson-Young, Professor of Social Justice, Northampton University, PROBabLE Futures Co-I
- Dr Michael Maher, Researcher in Social Innovation and Impact, Northampton University, PROBabLE Futures Specialist
Chair: Dr Michele Sevegnani – PROBabLE Futures Co-Lead, Reader in Computing Science Glasgow University
Panel Purpose
Based around the research of the PROBabLE Futures project and the work of Police AI, this panel will present five perspectives on ‘ingredients’ required for achieving responsible AI in policing and law enforcement: first, comprehensive knowledge of how AI is understood and operationalised, and the emerging governance architecture including evaluation, funding and accountability; secondly, policing bodies with commitment to the principles of effectiveness, transparency and responsibility; thirdly, deep understanding of contextual risks of technical deployments on criminal justice case progression, including potential ‘chaining’/knock-on effects on later stages of the system; fourthly, bespoke and comprehensive evaluation including consideration of human-AI interaction and workflow-level impacts, and finally, the contribution of participatory methods to achieving transparency, diverse governance and trustworthiness.
The papers presented in the panel exemplify the integrated interdisciplinary research, policy development and practitioner engagement required to develop lasting stakeholder impact and influence in this high-stakes context. Furthermore, we champion research and engagement that is defined by practical knowledge and understanding of an operational context, application, translation and critique of theoretical and technical concepts, with the independence of thought necessary for pragmatic conclusions and recommendations.
Participants will have the opportunity to discuss the approaches presented by the papers, and to introduce technological and governance challenges in criminal justice from their jurisdictions. Participants will be particularly encouraged to consider technical and other evaluation methods that will address the specific risks raised by the policing and criminal justice context, and to consider practical and effective methods of participatory consultation and governance.
Discussion questions
• How do we balance allowing criminal justice bodies to benefit from AI innovation with structures to ensure responsible use of AI?
• How can community representation make a genuine and lasting contribution to achieving responsible AI in policing and criminal justice?
• How do we create consistent and bespoke evaluation methods that can address the real contextual risks raised by AI in criminal justice?
Session B9: (Room B)
Chair: Dr Carlos (Chato) Castillo – Universitat Pompeu Fabra
- “Who Is the User? A Population-Grounded Framework for Assessing Behavioural Risk in AI Deployment.” ; Paula Szewach – Barcelona Supercomputing Center. (Submission #104)
- “What counts as harm? Power, knowledge, and human rights in AI governance.” ; Nina Zdanovic – Keio Univeristy and Shutaro Takeda – Keio university. (Submission #131)
- “When the Act Meets the Pact: Governing Europe’s Algorithmic Borders.” ; Tuba Bircan – Vrij Universiteit Brussel. (Submission #135)
- “From Trolley Problems to Contextual Cascades: Rethinking Ethical Context in AI Governance.” ; Rui Min – Hong Kong Baptist University. (Submission #150)
DS Special Track Session C9: Legitimacy in Algorithmic Mediation (Room C)
Chair: Prof Irene Ng – Group CEO, Dataswyft.
- “Who defines fraud in the age of generative AI? Producing suspicion and evaluating investigative AI agents beyond accuracy.” ; Anna Nesvijevskaia – University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Western Switzerland (HES-SO) and Pierre Guillod – University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Western Switzerland (HES-SO)(Submission #119)
- “Governing Inference: Translating Privacy Conditions into Institutional Design for AI-Mediated Behavioral Archives.” ; Liat Hasenfratz – Princeton University, Hadas Raviv – Princeton University, Uri Hasson – Princeton University and Casey Lew-Williams – Princeton University. (Submission #62)
- “Architectures That Cannot Answer: Schema Design and Decision-Event Reconstructability in 46 UK Algorithmic Transparency Records.” ; Hon Bor So – Independent researcher. (Submission #33)
Session D9: (Room D)
Chair:
- “Beyond the Black Box: Expert Perspectives on Fair AI in Urban Governance.” ; Charmaine Distor – University of Lausanne & United Nations University – EGOV, Soumaya Ben Dhaou – United Nations University – EGOV, Catarina Fontes – Technical University of Munich & United Nations University – EGOV, Tupokigwe Isagah – United Nations University – EGOV and Alia Yofira Karunian – United Nations University – EGOV. (Submission #153)
- “State-Led Data-Driven Governance Framework: Reconfiguring Space and Power in the Greater Bay Area, China.” ; Siyi Liu – University of Cambridge. (Submission #97)
- “Epistemic Structuring in Urban Heat Governance: How Data-Driven Tools Shape Municipal Energy Transition Policy.” ; Devin Diran – Leiden University and TNO. (Submission #185)
- “Does Online Attention Lead to Tourism Mobility and Expenditure? The Rise of “Busan Fever”.” ; Hyejin Jung – Pusan National University. (Submission #71)