OTTAWA—The Canadian government is considering the use of artificial intelligence to save time creating influential assessment profile reports of offenders as they go to federal prisons, and is running a small-scale trial to test it, the Star has learned.
Carney government releases AI road map that aims to make Canada a leader
Federal Politics
Carney government releases AI road map that aims to make Canada a leader
Mentioned in lengthy documents tabled in Parliament last month and confirmed by Correctional Service Canada (CSC), the test run comes as the Carney government tries to ramp up AI adoption, including with billions in a national strategy released this week.
But the prison trial, which CSC says has not yet been used in real cases, is raising concerns from AI experts, criminal defence lawyers and the federal NDP’s public safety critic, who argue a widespread adoption could lead to crucial errors, exacerbate racial biases and put offenders and victims at risk.
Criminal profile reports, as they are called, are detailed “foundational documents” prepared by CSC staff during a prisoner’s intake process that identify risks and play a role in major decisions like access to programs and likelihood of parole.
Drawing from scores of official documents, they include details about an offender’s criminal history, the circumstances of their crimes, patterns of violence or behavioural, mental health and addiction issues, family and social background, trauma history, education and employment records, and even victim impact statements.
“This is what defines your offence cycle,” criminal defence lawyer Nora Demnati said of those reports. “It will have an impact on everything else that comes.”
That’s why the Carney government should slow down and consult widely, including with the CSC union, its lawyers and the Privacy Commissioner of Canada before going further, said NDP MP Jenny Kwan, the party’s public safety critic. Neither the Union of Safety and Justice Employees or the Office of the Privacy Commissioner have been consulted yet, they told the Star.
Kwan warned of a multitude of legal concerns that go both ways and can have a “cascading impact”: Violating the rights of inmates if mistakes are added to reports, on one hand, or hurting victims and prison staff if crucial information is missed by the AI summaries, on the other.
“When you have those kinds of risks associated with correctional policing matters, you can imagine what the huge ramifications might be,” Kwan told the Star. “You could potentially compromise people’s legal rights.”
