15.-16. oktoobril 2025 Maltal
Dear Colleagues,
You probably agree with me when I say that one of the greatest strengths of our institutions is that we are closely connected to real life. Our work is never boring — and it always has meaning.
To truly protect human rights, democracy, and the rule of law, we, as ombudsmen and ombudswomen, must keep analyzing social change, remain open-minded, and embrace innovation.
In the age of digitalization and artificial intelligence, our job, in my opinion, is twofold.
First, we need to understand and use new technologies — when they help us serve people better. But second, we must also recognize the risks — and ensure that technologies used by governments do not harm people’s rights, or weaken democracy or the rule of law.
Humans must control machines — not the other way around.
Please allow me a general remark. You may or may not agree, but perhaps it is not such a great idea to make every part of our everyday life totally dependent on the internet, machines, AI, and electricity. Maybe people should not tie themselves to machines — and then just hope that no one — especially not AI — pulls the plug.
Back to law and our role as ombudsmen. The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the new EU AI Act give us clear legal support.
I believe we should amplify and clarify their message. It is not permitted to:
• collect or store personal data longer than absolutely necessary,
• merge personal data from different databases into one large dataset,
• use AI for predictive profiling or automated binding decisions.
Mass data processing is only allowed in exceptional cases — when it is clearly justified, the benefits clearly outweigh the risks, and proper safeguards are in place.
I very much appreciated what was said yesterday: our role is to support our parliaments — the elected representatives of the people. It is for the parliament to decide what is justified and where the proper balance lies between benefit and risk — within the framework of our constitutions and EU law, of course.
I believe we must emphasize how important it is to invest in cybersecurity and to use the best available privacy technologies. Cybersecurity must be a top priority in our own institutions as well, since we store large amounts of sensitive data.
If personal and other sensitive data are already collected, it is crucial to protect them properly — against hackers, corruption, and cybercrime. Ultimately, this is essential to maintain public trust.
Our task will not be easy. Technology enthusiasts sometimes say — perhaps you’ve heard this too — that lawyers and human rights activists are ruining everything and letting China win the AI race.
I firmly believe we must insist on preserving human dignity, a free society, and its foundation: personal and political freedoms.
There are people in every society who believe that if governments could just monitor and control everything, all risks would disappear. Let the police use all the tools — surveillance cameras, facial recognition, body language sensors, backdoors, communication monitoring!
No crime. No missing children. No graffiti. No car crashes. Every tax paid.
And — why stop there? (I say this ironically.) Why not put people in prison before they commit a crime — or even start preparing for it? Technically, this is possible with AI.
But is it compatible with human rights? Is this the kind of society we truly want to live in?
“Nicht alles, was möglich ist, ist auch richtig” — "Not everything that is possible is also right", say German lawyers and philosophers. They know what they’re talking about.
The experience of the DDR and the Stasi has shaped their views to this day — and rightly so.
In fact, many of us — or our parents and grandparents — have lived in totalitarian societies.
We know how mass surveillance and censorship destroyed trust and freedom.
We must learn from history — and not repeat its mistakes.
Dear colleagues,
I believe our job is to encourage innovation and the positive use of AI — and to speak up when rights and freedoms are at high risk. We must remind decision-makers, tech companies, and society at large: public trust and constitutional values are not obstacles. They are the foundation of a free society.
As our dear colleague Maija Sakslin said: To promote a good life and happiness, we must protect trust — the trust between people, and the trust in institutions.
Only when we protect human dignity and human rights can technology truly help our societies grow stronger.
Thank you.