Legal Personality of Robots
الشخصية القانونية للروبوتات
This academic article examines the debate surrounding the legal personality of robots and artificial intelligence systems. It explores arguments from both proponents and opponents of granting legal status to robots, reviews international and comparative legal positions, and suggests that legislators should establish a clear legal framework to address robot liability and foster technological innovation.
Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.
Who issued it
Who it governs
Legal scholars, legislators, and researchers interested in the intersection of artificial intelligence, robotics, and civil liability law.
What the document contains
The article addresses the legal nature of robots, arguments for and against granting them legal personality, comparative international positions, and the implications for civil and criminal liability.
It does not provide binding statutory text, administrative regulations, or enforceable judicial rulings, as it is an academic research study.
- Granting legal personality to robots remains a subject of ongoing debate between proponents and opponents among legal scholars.
- Most countries and international organizations currently treat robots as objects rather than independent legal persons.
- Proponents argue that electronic personhood or corporate-style legal status can properly allocate liability and encourage innovation.
- Opponents contend that robots lack true consciousness and free will, making legal personality an unnecessary and potentially dangerous legal fiction.
- Clear legislative intervention is needed to balance technological innovation with the protection of human rights and patient interests.
· مقدمة · المبحث الأول: المؤيدون لفكرة منح الشخصية القانونية للروبوتات · المبحث الثاني: الرافضون لفكرة منح الشخصية القانونية للروبوتات · المبحث الثالث: الروبوتات والحاجة للشخصية القانونية · المبحث الرابع: موقف القوانين الدولية من الروبوتات · الخاتمة
How it scores
Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.
Fairness
0/5Non-discrimination and equitable treatment
screening score · 2026-10-23
Human Oversight
3/5Humans remain in control of consequential decisions
الروبوتات لا تملك ذمة مالية منفصلة عن الشركات المُصنِعة لها، كما أنها لا تتمتع بالاستقلالية التامة عن صانعيها ومشغليها من البشر
Abstract
screening score · 2026-10-23
Privacy
0/5Protection of personal data and private life
screening score · 2026-10-23
Transparency
1/5Openness about how AI systems work and are used
وأشار إلى أهمية إنشاء سجل خاص للروبوتات الذكية يحتوي على جميع المعلومات المتعلقة بها
المبحث الرابع
screening score · 2026-10-23
Enforcement
4/5Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force
إثبات الشخصية القانونية للروبوتات يصحبه وجود ذمة مالية مستقلة للروبوتات بصفة عامة، على غرار ما سعى إليه البرلمان الأوروبي من خلال اقتراح إنشاء صندوق تأميني لمعالجة الأضرار
المبحث الثالث
screening score · 2026-10-23
Impact Assessment
3/5Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use
Calls on the Commission, when carrying out an impact assessment of its future legislative instrument, to explore, analyse and consider the implications of all possible legal solutions
المبحث الأول
screening score · 2026-10-23