Criminal risks of medical robots turnover

Objective: to identify criminal risks inherent in a medical robot, taking into account its hardware-technological (technological and digital) features, and to construct, based on this analysis, the author’s classification of criminal risks and models of criminal-legal protection of public relations arising in the medical robots’ turnover.

Methods: the article uses general scientific (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, classification) and specific scientific methods of cognition, and the logical-legal method.

Results: The security vulnerability of medical robots causes serious concern in manufacturers, programmers and those interacting with the robots in the healthcare industry. In medical institutions, robots interact closely with children, the elderly and the disabled, and it may not be clear to the patient whether the robot is working properly or being attacked. Any harm caused by a surgical robot as a result of unauthorized access (or other illegal actions) can undermine the public’s faith in medicine and in the healthcare system as a whole. Threats to the safety of medical robots can have further negative consequences for themselves, as such facts of unlawful influence can lead to robots breaking down or harming other nearby equipment that is the property of the healthcare institution, and worse – the life and health of patients or medical workers. In this regard, the paper identifies criminal risks and threats inherent in medical robots, and formulates measures to improve criminal legislation aimed at countering crimes arising against the legal turnover of medical robots (Article 2352 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

Scientific novelty: at the moment there are few Russian studies devoted to the legal regulation and protection of medical robots. Basically, such researches are done by medical scientists. However, in the Russian Federation, there are practically no special theoretical-legal studies, including those devoted to the study of criminal law issues of the protection of these legal relations, which confirms the relevance and significance of our research.

Practical significance: the provisions and conclusions of the article can be used to further improve criminal legislation, and also lay the foundation for further research in criminal law science.

1. Alemzadeh, H., Raman, J., Leveson, N., Kalbarczyk, Z., & Iyer, R. K. (2016). Adverse events in robotic surgery: a retrospective study of 14 years of FDA data. PLoS ONE, 11(4), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151470

2. Asimov, I. (2019). Runaround. In Astounding Science Fiction (pp. 94–103). New York: Street & Smith Publication Inc.

3. Baburin, V. V. (2010). Legal infliction of harm during a risky behavior aimed at achieving a socially useful objective: problems of determining reasonability. Scientific Bulletin of the Omsk Academy of the MIA of Russia, 1, 11–17.

4. Begishev, I. R. (2022). Criminal-legal protection of social relations associated with robotics: thesis for a Doctoral Degree in Jurisprudence. Kazan.

5. Begishev, I. R. (2022). Criminal-legal regulation of robotics: monograph. Moscow: Blok-Print.

6. Fiorini, P., Goldberg, K. Y., Liu, Y., & Taylor, R. H. (2022). Concepts and Trends in Autonomy for Robot-Assisted Surgery. In Proceedings of the IEEE, 110(7), 993–1011. https://doi.org/10.1109/jproc.2022.3176828

7. Gallese Nobile, C. (2023). Regulating Smart Robots and Artificial Intelligence in the European Union. Journal of Digital Technologies and Law, 1(1), 33–61. https://doi.org/10.21202/jdtl.2023.2

8. Gracheva, Yu. V., & Aryamov, A. A. (2020). Robotization and Artificial Intelligence: Criminal Law Risks in the Field of Public Security. Actual Problems of Russian Law, 15(6), 169–178. https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2020.115.6.169-178

9. Gulyaeva, P. S. (2023). Medical nanorobots in the focus of law. Journal of Digital Technologies and Law, 1(1), 89–122. https://doi.org/10.21202/jdtl.2023.4

10. Istratova, E. E., & Molchanov, A. A. (2015).Features of protection of personal information in medical information systems. Journal of Siberian Medical Sciences, 6, 59.

11. Kartskhia, A. A. (2021). A modern challenge of the digital healthcare emergence. Law and Digital Economy, 3, 39–46.

12. Langman, S., Capicotto, N., Maddahi, Y., & Zareinia, K. (2021). Roboethics principles and policies in Europe and North America. SN Applied Sciences, 3, 857. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-021-04853-5

13. Lutz, C., Schöttler, M., & Hoffmann, C. P. (2019). The privacy implications of social robots: scoping review and expert interviews. Mobile Media & Communication, 7(3), 412–434. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157919843961

14. Maleina, M. N. (2023). Legal regulation of of using medical robots-surgeons in a complex of digital technologies. Medical Law, 1, 2–5.

15. Mikhaleva, E. S., & Shubina, E. A. (2019). Challenges and Prospects of the Legal Regulation of Robotics. Actual Problems of Russian Law, 1(12), 26–35. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2019.109.12.026-035

16. Nissenbaum, H. (2001). Securing trust online: wisdom or oxymoron. Boston Univ Law Revew, 81(3), 635–664.

17. Osborne, Ch. (2022). Critical vulnerabilities uncovered in hospital robots. ZDNet. https://www.zdnet.com/article/critical-vulnerabilities-uncovered-in-medical-robots/

18. Pasquale, F. (2020). Introduction. In New Laws of Robotics (pp. 1–32). Belknap Press.

19. Prizhennikova, A. N. (2020). Legal field of robotics: solutions. Education and Law, 9, 308–317.

20. Prokhorova, M. L., & Ilikbaeva, E. S. (2017). The specific nature of medical devices as a target of crime stipulated by Article 238.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Society: Politics, Economics, Law, 12, 111–114.

21. Rarog, A. I. (2018). Illegal production of medical agents and equipment (Article 235.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Russian Journal of Criminology, 6. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/nezakonnoe-proizvodstvo-lekarstvennyh-sredstvi-meditsinskih-izdeliy-statya-235-1-uk-rf

22. Schmitz-Luhn, B., Chandler, J., & on Behalf Of The iCARE-Pd Consortium. (2022). Ethical and Legal Aspects of TechnologyAssisted Care in Neurodegenerative Disease. Journal of Personalized Medicine, 12(6), 1011. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12061011

23. Tsomartova, F. V. (2020). Robotization in healthcare: legal perspective. Health care of the Russian Federation, 64(2), 88–96. https://doi.org/10.46563/0044-197X-2020-64-2-88-96

24. Weng, Y. H, & Hirata, Y. (2022). Design-Centered HRI Governance for Healthcare Robots. Journal of Healthcare Engineering, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3935316

25. Yew, G. Ch. K. (2021). Trust in and Ethical Design of Carebots: The Case for Ethic of Care. International Journal of Social Robotics, 13, 629–645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00653-w

26. Zapisnaya, T. V. (2022). On the establishment of the digital medical law. Medical Law, 1, 34–38.