Institute for Political Studies

11 Dobrinjska Street
(4th floor)
11000 Belgrade

Contact details
SR
SR
Српска политичка мисао 6/2025

MODERNIZATION OF THE LAW ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM: ТHE USE OF CONTEMPORARY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TOOLS IN CRIME PREVENTION AND SUPPRESSION

Authors
UDCUDC 327:351.74:004.8(4-672EU) Pages93-118 Year2025
Download PDF 10.5937/spm94-59854
Research overview

Abstract

Law enforcement agencies represent one of the most significant users of artificial intelligence–based systems in the context of contemporary manifestations of crime. Police agencies, as well as those operating within the criminal justice system, already make extensive use of various systems, software, and tools in the field of crime prevention and suppression. This article analyzes the application of existing artificial intelligence systems by law enforcement agencies through a critical review of relevant academic and professional literature, along with an illustration of examples of systems, software, and tools used in the operational context. In the first chapter, the possibilities of applying artificial intelligence systems in the field of crime prevention are presented through an overview of specific software for predicting crime and the criminal behavior of individuals, including risk assessments of recidivism and repeat victimization. In the second chapter, the possibilities of applying specific systems, software, and tools in the field of crime suppression are presented, starting from the receipt of criminal reports, the preparation and planning of criminal investigations, and up to their application in the area of international police cooperation. Finally, the article points out the controversies surrounding the use of artificial intelligence by law enforcement agencies, considering several aspects such as technological, legal, ethical, and social.

Sources and literature

References

  1. Aleksić, Živojin, and Milan Škulić. 2016. Kriminalistika. Beograd: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.
  2. Álvarez, Ramon. 2019. “La inteligencia artificial de la Policía que desenmascara denuncias falsas.” LaVanguardia. April 13, 2019. https://www.lavanguardia.com/tecnologia/20190414/461583468024/veripol-policia-nacional-inteligencia-artificial-algoritmo-denuncias-falsas.html
  3. Banh, Leonardo, and Strobel Gero. 2023. “Generative artificial intelligence.” Electronic Markets 33 (1): 1–17. DOI: 10.1007/s12525-023-00680-1
  4. Benbouzid, Bilel. 2019. “To predict and to manage. Predictive policing in the United States.” Big Data & Society 6 (1): 205395171986170. DOI: 10.1177/2053951719861703
  5. Big Brother Watch. 2020. Big Brother Watch briefing on algorithmic decision-making in the criminal justice system. London: Big Brother Watch.
  6. Blomberg, Thomas, William Bales, Karen Mann, Ryan Meldrum, and Joe Nedelec [Blomberg et al]. 2010. Validation of the COMPAS risk assessment classification instrument. Tallahassee, FL: College of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Florida State University.
  7. Bradford, Ben, Arabella Kyprianides, Will Andrews, Elizabeth Aston, Estelle Clayton, Megan O’Neill, and Helen Wells [Bradford et al]. 2025. “‘To whom am I speaking?’
  8. Public responses to crime reporting via live chat with human versus AI police operators.” Policing and Society 35: 1036–1052. DOI: 10.1080/10439463.2025.2453437
  9. Brauneis, Robert, and Ellen P. Goodman. 2018. “Algorithmic transparency for the smart city.” Yale Journal of Law & Technology 20: 103–176. DOI: 10.7282/00000058
  10. Brennan, Tim, and William Dieterich. 2018. “Correctional offender management profiles for alternative sanctions (COMPAS).” In Handbook of recidivism risk/needs assessment tools, 1st edition, eds. Jay P. Singh, Daryl G. Kroner, J. Stephen Wormith, Sarah L. Desmarais, and Zachary Hamilton, 49–75. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
  11. Brennan, Tim, William Dieterich, and Beate Ehret. 2009. “Evaluating the predictive validity of the COMPAS risk and needs assessment system.” Criminal Justice and Behavior 36 (1): 21–40. DOI: 10.1177/0093854808326545
  12. Caplan, Joel M., and Leslie W. Kennedy. 2011. Risk terrain modeling compendium: for crime analysis. New Jersey: Rutgers Center on Public Security.
  13. Caplan, Joel M., Leslie W. Kennedy, Jeremy D. Barnum, and Eric L. Piza [Caplan et al] 2015. “Risk terrain modeling for spatial risk assessment.” Cityscape 17 (1): 7–16.
  14. Chicago Police Department. n.d. “Crime and Victimization Risk Model (CVRM).” Chicago Police Department. Last accessed on June 16, 2025. https://www.chicagopolice.org/wp-content/uploads/FACT-SHEET-Crime-and-Victimization-Risk-Model-1.pdf
  15. Council of the European Union. 2019. Manual on Law Enforcement Information Exchange. Brusseles: Council of the European Union.
  16. Degeling, Martin, and Bettina Berendt. 2017. “What is wrong about Robocops as consultants? A technology-centric critique of predictive policing.” AI & Society 33 (3): 347–356. DOI: 10.1007/s00146-017-0730-7
  17. Dressel, Julia, and Farid Hany. 2018. “The accuracy, fairness, and limits of predicting recidivism.” Science Advances 4 (1): eaao5580. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aao5580
  18. Dubravova, Hana, Jan Cap, Kristyna Holubova, and Lukas Hribnak [Dubravova et al.]. 2024. “Artificial intelligence as an innovative element of support in policing.” Procedia Computer Science 237: 237–244. DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2024.05.101
  19. Engel, Christoph, Lorenz Linhardt, and Marcel Schubert [Engel et al]. 2024. “Code is law: how COMPAS affects the way the judiciary handles the risk of recidivism.” Artificial Intelligence and Law 33: 383–404. DOI: 10.1007/s10506-024-09389-8
  20. European Commission [EC]. 2018a. “Artificial Intelligence for Europe.” EUR-Lex, Access to European Union law. April 25, 2018. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=COM:2018:237:FIN
  21. European Commission [EC]. 2018b. “Visual Analytics for Sense-making in Criminal Intelligence Analysis (VALCRI).” CORDIS EU research results. October 18, 2018. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/608142/reporting
  22. EUROPOL. 2024. “More than 3 000 law enforcement authorities now connected to Europol.” EUROPOL. April 12, 2024. https://www.europol.europa.eu/media-press/newsroom/news/more-3-000-law-enforcement-authorities-now-connected-to-europol
  23. EUROPOL. 2025. “Secure Information Exchange Network Application (SIENA).” EUROPOL. August 13, 2024. https://www.europol.europa.eu/operations-services-and-innovation/services-support/information-exchange/secure-information-exchange-network-application-siena
  24. Fair Trials. 2021. “Automatic injustice: The use of artificial intelligence & automated decision-making systems in criminal justice in Europe.” Fair Trials. Last accessed on May 1, 2025. https://www.fairtrials.org/app/uploads/2021/11/Automating_Injustice.pdf
  25. Feldstein, Steven. 2019a. “How artificial intelligence is reshaping repression.” Journal of Democracy 30 (1): 40–52. DOI: 10.1353/jod.2019.0003
  26. Feldstein, Steven. 2019b. The Global Expansion of AI Surveillance. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
  27. Ferguson, Andrew. 2017. “Policing predictive policing.” Washington University Law Review 94 (5): 1109–1189.
  28. Ferguson, Andrew. 2019. “Predictive Policing Theory.” In The Cambridge handbook of policing in the United States–1st ed, eds. Tamara Lave and Erick Miller, 491–510. UK: Cambridge University Press.
  29. Fornasier, Mateus de Oliveira, and Gustavo Silveira Borges. 2023. “The Chinese “Sharp Eyes” system in the era of hyper surveillance: Between State use and risks to privacy.” Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas 13 (1): 440–453.
  30. Frontline. n.d. “Meet Lizzy: your team’s assistant for assessing domestic abuse risk.” Frontline. Last accessed on June 10, 2025. https://www.frontline100.com/product
  31. Hauck, Roslin V., Atabakhsh Homa, Ongvasith Pichai, Gupta Harsh, and Chen Hsinchun [Hauck et al]. 2002. “Using Coplink to analyze criminal-justice data.” Computer 35 (3): 30–37.
  32. Hilton, N. Zoe, Grant T. Harris, Marnie E. Rice, Ruth E. Houghton, and Angela W. Eke [Hilton et al.]. 2008. “An indepth actuarial assessment for wife assault recidivism: The domestic violence risk appraisal guide.” Law and Human Behavior 32 (2): 150–163. DOI: 10.1007/s10979-007-9088-6
  33. Hollywood, Jоhns S., Kenneth N. McKay, Dulani Woods, and Denis Agneil [Hollywood et al]. 2019. Real-Time Crime Centers in Chicago. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
  34. Hutt, Oliver Kenneth. 2020. “Understanding the deterrent effect of police patrol.” PhD diss. UCL: University College London.
  35. INTERPOL. 2020. “INSIGHT INTERPOL analytical platform: Broshure.” INTERPOL. Last accessed on June 20, 2025. https://www.interpol.int/Resources/Documents#Publications
  36. INTERPOL. n.d. “Project INSIGHT. INTERPOL.” INTERPOL. Last accessed on June 20, 2025. https://www.interpol.int/en/How-we-work/Criminal-intelligence-analysis/Projects/Project-INSIGHT
  37. Joh, Elizabeth E. 2017. “Artificial intelligence and policing: First questions.” Seattle University Law Review 41 (4): 1139–1144.
  38. Kirchner, Lauren, and Rose Goldstein. 2021. “PredPol’s predictive policing software disproportionately targeted Black and Latino neighborhoods.” The Markup. December 2, 2021. https://themarkup.org/prediction-bias/2021/12/02/crime-prediction-software-promised-to-be-free-of-biases-new-data-shows-it-perpetuates-them
  39. Lagioia, Francesca, Riccardo Rovatti, and Giovanni Sartor [Lagioia et al.] 2023. “Algorithmic fairness through group parities? The case of COMPAS-SAPMOC.” AI & Society 38 (2): 459–478. DOI: 10.1007/s00146-022-01441-y
  40. Lu, Sylvia. 2020. “Algorithmic opacity, private accountability, and corporate social disclosure in the age of artificial intelligence.” Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law 99 (1): 99–160.
  41. Marchment, Zoe, and Paul Gill. 2021. “Systematic review and meta-analysis of risk terrain modelling (RTM) as a spatial forecasting method.” Crime Science 10 (1): 1–11. DOI: 10.1186/s40163-021-00149-6
  42. Martinez, Rex. 2018. “Artificial intelligence: Distinguishing between types & definitions.” Nevada Law Journal 19 (3): 1015–1042.
  43. McDaniel, Јоhn, and Ken Pease, eds. 2021. Predictive policing and artificial intelligence. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
  44. Mohler, George, Martin Short, Jeffrey Brantingham, Frederick Schoenberg, and George Tita [Mohler еt al]. 2011. “Self-exciting point process modeling of crime.” Journal of the american statistical association 106 (493): 100–108. DOI: 10.1198/jasa.2011.ap09546
  45. Mohler, George, Martin Short, Sean Malinowski, Mark Johnson, George Tita, Andrea Bertozzi, and Jeffrey Brantingham [Mohler еt al]. 2015. “Randomized controlled field trials of predictive policing.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 110 (512): 1399–1411. DOI: 10.1080/01621459.2015.1077710
  46. Muir, Rick, and Felicity O’Connell. 2025. Policing and artificial intelligence. London: Police Foundation.
  47. Nehra, Ekta. 2015. Artificial intelligence in modern times. New Delphy: ICRISEM, YMCA.
  48. Northpointe. 2015. Practitioners Guide to COMPAS. Traverse City, MI: Northpointe.
  49. Odekerken, Daphne. 2024. “AI tool helps citizens file complete reports.” Utrecht University. December 19, 2024 https://www.uu.nl/en/news/ai-tool-helps-citizens-file-complete-reports
  50. Odekerken, Daphne, Floris Bex, AnneMarie Borg, and Bas Testerink [Odekerken et al]. 2022. “Approximating stability for applied argument-based inquiry.” Intelligent Systems with Application 16 (3): 200110. DOI: 10.1016/j.iswa.2022.200110
  51. Oswald, Marion, Jamie Grace, Sheena Urwin, and Geoffrey C. Barnes [Oswald et al]. 2018. “Algorithmic risk assessment policing models: lessons from the Durham HART model and ‘Experimental’ proportionality.’” Information & Communications Technology Law 27 (2): 223–250. DOI: 10.1080/13600834.2018.1458455
  52. Perry, Walter L., Brian McInnis, Carter C. Price, Susan Smith, and John S. Hollywood [Perry et al]. 2013. Predictive policing: The role of crimeforecasting in law enforcement operations. Washington, DC: RAND Corporation.
  53. Prlja, Dragan, Gordana Gasmi, and Vanja Korać [Prlja et al]. 2022. Ljudska prava i veštačka inteligencija. Beograd: Institut za uporedno pravo.
  54. Qiang, Xiao. 2021. “Chinese digital authoritarianism and its global impact.” In POMEPS studies 43: Digital activism and authoritarian adaptation in the Middle East, ed. Marc Lynch, 35–40. Washington, DC: George Washington University and Institute for Middle East Studies.
  55. Ramos, Sofia, José Ángel Perez-Lopez, and Rute Abreu [Ramos et al]. 2020. “An analysis of the importance of the artificial intelligence on the information system of police forces.” In Proceedings of the 15th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI 2020), 1–6. Seville, Spain: Iberian Association for Information.
  56. Ratcliffe, Jerry, Ralph Taylor, Amber Askey, Kevin Thomas, John Grasso, Kevin Bethel, Ryan Fisher, and Josh Koehnlein [Ratcliffe et al]. 2021. “The Philadelphia predictive policing experiment.” Journal of Experimental Criminology 17 (3): 15–41. DOI: 10.1007/s11292-019-09400-2
  57. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on Artificial Intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No 300/2008, (EU) No 167/2013, (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Artificial Intelligence Act), OJ L, 12. 7. 2024.
  58. Sacha, Dominik, Wolfgang Jentner, Leishi Zhang, Florian Stoffel, Geoffrey Ellis, and Daniel Keim [Sacha et al.]. 2017. “Applying visual interactive dimensionality reduction to criminal intelligence analysis.” In VALCRI WhitePaper Series, ed. B.L. William Wong, 1–11. Konstanz, Germany: Universität Konstanz, and London, UK: Middlesex University.
  59. SoundThinking. n.d. “CrimeTracer™: Generate immediate investigative leads with a proven tool used by 2,500 agencies.” SoundThinking. Last accessed on June 20, 2025. https://www.soundthinking.com/law-enforcement/crime-analysis-crimetracer/
  60. Shapiro, Aaron. 2019. “Predictive policing for reform? Indeterminacy and intervention in big data policing.” Surveillance & Society 17 (3/4): 456–472. DOI: 10.24908/ss.v17i3/4.10410
  61. Siu, Sai Cheong. 2024. “Revolutionizing translation with AI: Unravelling neural machine translation and generative pre-trained large language models.” In New advances in translation technology: Applications and pedagogy, eds. Yuhong Peng, Huihui Huang and Defeng Li, 29–54. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.
  62. Trafford, Lucy, Le Ba Linh, Firtala Sabina, and Babatunde Williams [Trafford et al]. 2024. “Lizzy–Building an AI-powered domestic abuse risk assessment tool based on nationally representative online survey data.” OSF PREPRINTS: 1–36. DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/shpjm
  63. Urwin, Sheena. 2016. “Algorithmic forecasting of offender dangerousness for police custody officers: An assessment of accuracy for the Durham Constabulary.” Master’s thesis. University of Cambridge.
  64. Van Brakel, Rosamunde. 2025. “Legal, еthical, and social issues of AI and law enforcement in Europe: The case of predictive policing.” In The Cambridge Handbook of the Law, Ethics and Policy of Artificial Intelligence, ed. Nathalie Smuha (ed.), 367–382. UK: Cambridge University Press.
  65. Weir, Kevin, Stephanie Kilili, John Cooper, Andrew Crowe, and Gillian Routledge [Weir et al]. 2022. “Checkpoint: an innovative Programme to navigate people away from the cycle of reoffending–a randomised control trial evaluation.” The Police Journal: Тheory, Practice and Principles 95 (3): 562–589. DOI: 10.1177/0032258X211018774
  66. West Midlands Police. 2023. Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) – Stage 1. West Midland: West Midlands Police.
  67. West Yorkshire Police. n. d.. “National Data Analytics Solution (NDAS) Privacy Notice.” West Yorkshire Police. Last accessed on June 12, 2025. https://www.westyorkshire.police.uk/advice/modern-slavery/national-data-analytics-solution-ndas-privacy-notice
  68. Zilka, Miri, Holli Sargenat, and Adrian Weller [Zilka et al]. 2022. “Transparency, governance and regulation of algorithmic tools deployed in the criminal justice system: a UK case study.” In Proceedings of the 2022 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, eds. Vincent Conitzer, John Tasioulas, Matthias Scheutz, Ryan Calo, Martina Mara, and Annette Zimmermann, 880–889. New York: Association for Computing Machinary.
  69. Žarković, Milan, and Zvonimir Ivanović. 2020. Kriminalistička taktika – treće izdanje. Beograd: Kriminalističko-policijski univerzitet.
From the same issue

Related publications