Police Chief Tells U.N. AI Must Support, Not Replace Human Judgment

Rwanda's Inspector General of Police, Felix Namuhoranye, recently addressed the United Nations Chiefs of Police Summit (UNCOPS 2026), advocating for robust safeguards in the application of artificial intelligence (AI) within criminal investigations. He underscored that AI must serve to support, rather than supplant, human judgment, emphasizing the critical need for accountability, transparency, and adherence to human rights as law enforcement agencies increasingly integrate AI-powered tools. This stance highlights a growing global and national imperative to balance technological innovation with ethical responsibility and legal compliance, particularly in jurisdictions like Rwanda that are actively adopting advanced policing technologies. The discussion points to the intersection of emerging AI capabilities with existing data protection and criminal procedure laws, necessitating careful legal and policy development to ensure public trust and the integrity of the justice system.

The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into law enforcement operations worldwide presents both unprecedented opportunities and significant legal and ethical challenges. This evolving landscape was recently brought into sharp focus by Rwanda’s Inspector General of Police, Felix Namuhoranye, during his address at the Fifth United Nations Chiefs of Police Summit (UNCOPS 2026). Speaking on the application of AI in criminal investigations, CG Namuhoranye articulated a crucial principle: AI must function as a supportive tool for human judgment, not a replacement for it.

This declaration by Rwanda's police chief is particularly pertinent given the country's proactive adoption of advanced technologies in policing, including AI-powered forensic tools, smart cameras, and sophisticated surveillance systems. His remarks underscore a global consensus emerging among legal professionals and policymakers that technological advancement in law enforcement must be meticulously matched by robust governance frameworks, continuous training, stringent data protection measures, and an unwavering commitment to human rights and the rule of law. This article will delve into the legal implications of AI use in Rwandan criminal investigations, examining the existing regulatory landscape, potential challenges, and the imperative for a human-centric approach to AI deployment.

Rwanda has made significant strides in establishing a digital legal framework to govern its increasingly technology-driven society. Central to this is Law No. 058/2021 of 13 October 2021, relating to the Protection of Personal Data and Privacy, which provides a comprehensive framework for the collection, processing, storage, and sharing of personal data. This law is foundational for regulating AI in law enforcement, as it mandates principles such as consent, lawfulness, fairness, transparency, purpose limitation, and accuracy in data processing. Crucially, it grants data subjects rights, including the right not to be subject to automated decision-making.

Complementing the data protection framework are Law No. 60/2018 of 22 August 2018 on Prevention and Punishment of Cyber Crimes, which addresses cyber offenses and cybersecurity measures, and Law No. 24/2016 of 18 June 2016 Governing Information and Communication Technologies. The Rwandan Criminal Procedure Code (Law No. 027/2019 of 19 September 2019) and the Rwandan Evidence Law (Law No. 22/99 of 12/11/1999) also contain provisions relevant to digital and electronic evidence, requiring authenticity and relevance for admissibility in judicial proceedings. The Rwanda National Police itself operates under Law N°46/2010 of 14/12/2010, which outlines its powers, responsibilities, organization, and functioning, emphasizing the safeguarding of fundamental rights and accountability to the community. These legal instruments collectively form the bedrock upon which the responsible integration of AI into Rwandan law enforcement must be built.

The Rwandan police chief's call for AI to support, not replace, human judgment resonates with international best practices and emerging global governance frameworks for AI in law enforcement. Organizations like INTERPOL and UNICRI have developed a "Toolkit for Responsible AI Innovation in Law Enforcement," which outlines core principles such as lawfulness, minimization of harm, human autonomy, fairness, and good governance. These principles directly address the legal challenges posed by AI, including the potential for algorithmic bias, privacy violations, and issues of accountability.

In Rwanda, the application of AI in criminal investigations, such as through facial recognition in body-worn cameras or automated number plate recognition, must navigate the strictures of the Data Protection Law. For instance, Article 6 of Law No. 058/2021 requires explicit consent for personal data processing, which becomes complex when AI systems collect data from individuals in public spaces. While the law provides for other lawful bases for processing, such as public interest or legal obligation, the use of AI must still respect data subjects' rights, including the right to object to processing for automated decision-making. This necessitates clear guidelines on when and how AI-driven decisions can be made, and how human oversight is maintained to prevent the erosion of due process.

Furthermore, the evidentiary value of AI-generated insights in criminal proceedings requires careful consideration under Rwanda's Evidence Law. While electronic evidence is admissible, its authenticity and integrity must be verified. AI systems, particularly those employing complex algorithms, can suffer from a lack of transparency or "black box" problem, making it challenging to explain how a particular conclusion was reached. This opacity can undermine the ability to challenge evidence, impacting the right to a fair trial. The African Union's Continental AI Strategy, adopted in July 2024, also emphasizes ethical and inclusive AI development, calling for robust governance based on human rights and the rule of law, and encouraging alignment with national data protection laws to address regulatory gaps. This continental approach provides a broader context for Rwanda's efforts, highlighting the shared challenges and the need for harmonized, human-centric AI governance across Africa.

Finally, the accountability for errors or biases introduced by AI systems remains a critical legal gap. If an AI system contributes to a wrongful arrest or conviction, determining liability among developers, operators, and human supervisors is complex. The Rwandan legal framework, particularly the Cyber Crime Law, addresses offenses related to cyber activities but may require specific amendments or interpretations to cover AI-specific liabilities. The emphasis on human judgment as a final arbiter, as advocated by CG Namuhoranye, is therefore not merely an ethical preference but a pragmatic necessity to ensure that accountability pathways remain clear and that fundamental rights are protected in the digital age of policing.

The Rwandan police chief's assertion that AI must support, not replace, human judgment in criminal investigations serves as a timely reminder for legal practitioners and policymakers globally. For attorneys in Rwanda, this means a heightened need to understand the interplay between emerging AI technologies and existing legal frameworks, particularly Law No. 058/2021 on Data Protection and Privacy, Law No. 60/2018 on Cyber Crimes, and the Criminal Procedure Code. Practitioners must be prepared to scrutinize the provenance and reliability of AI-generated evidence, challenge potential algorithmic biases, and advocate for the preservation of human oversight and due process rights in cases involving AI tools.

Looking ahead, the responsible integration of AI in Rwandan law enforcement will necessitate continuous legal evolution. This includes developing specific regulations or guidelines for AI deployment, ensuring transparency in algorithmic decision-making, and establishing clear accountability mechanisms. As Rwanda continues its digital transformation, aligning national AI strategies with the broader principles of the African Union's Continental AI Strategy and international human rights standards will be crucial. The legal community must remain vigilant, actively participating in the discourse to shape a future where technological innovation in policing genuinely enhances justice and public safety without compromising fundamental freedoms.