Sinéad Gibney (Dublin Rathdown, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

447. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality if he has considered introducing a law to make it an offence to use a person’s features to produce artificial intelligence deepfakes, similar to proposals in Germany and Denmark, particularly in relation to the use of this technology to create revenge porn; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40642/25]

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The rate of development in AI tools is unprecedented. A whole of Government approach is required to address AI challenges effectively and harness AI opportunities. My Department has engaged, and continues to engage, with counterparts across other Departments on digital matters, including AI.

As the Deputy will be aware, the Government includes a Minister of State for Trade Promotion, Artificial Intelligence and Digital Transformation, Ms Niamh Smyth, TD, which is the first time there has been a portfolio concerning AI.

The Department of Enterprise led the negotiations on the AI Act and is leading on its implementation at a national level. The Department of Enterprise established an independent AI Advisory Council to provide expert advice to the Irish Government on all aspects of artificial intelligence. The Council comprises leading experts from academia, industry and civil society.

Earlier this year the Advisory Council published a report “Ireland’s AI Advisory Council Recommendations - Helping to Shape Ireland’s AI Future”, which includes the following advice on Deepfakes: 'Addressing AI Misuse - Deepfakes and Digital Cloning: In light of the potential misuse of AI, such as widely available technology that can digitally clone the image, likeness, and/or voice of individuals, the Council recommends that the Government considers introducing a specific law prohibiting the creation of digital "deep fakes" of individuals without their consent'.

This document was presented to the Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment Peter Burke, TD, and the AI and Digital Transformation Minister of State, Niamh Smyth, TD. This report was also shared with the Department of An Taoiseach. Minister Burke has publicly stated his commitment to ensure the contents of this report are considered by Government.

The Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act 2020 (also known as “Coco’s Law”) defines the term “intimate image” broadly in order to capture all of the potential means by which intimate images may be produced. This covers AI-generated materials and deepfakes. The term “intimate image” in the Act “means any visual representation (including any accompanying sound or document) made by any means including any photographic, film, video or digital representation”.

The 2020 Act also criminalises the distribution, publishing, or threats to distribute or publish such deepfakes. The Act contains both summary and indictable offences - including imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years and class A fines.

The Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 is already framed so that no distinction can made between AI- generated material and other child sexual abuse material. Section 2(2) provides that: “The reference in paragraph (a) of the definition of child pornography to a person shall be construed as including a reference to a figure resembling a person that has been generated or modified by computer-graphics or otherwise”. The existing penalties in Ireland’s national legislation exceed all of the maximum sentences in the Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA and also exceed all of the revised maximum sentences proposed in the Revising Directive currently being negotiated at EU level.

There is no stand-alone provision under Irish law that provides that identity theft/fraud constitutes an offence, however it is addressed through a combination of legislative measures, primarily the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud) Offences Act 2001 and the Criminal Justice (Offences Relating to Information Systems) Act 2017.

Section 6(1) of the 2001 Act provides a broad offence of making gain or causing loss by deception which can be applied to the fraudulent use of another person's identity. This can capture a range of identity-based misconduct where deception results in financial or personal gain. For instance, using stolen identity details to open a bank account or access credit could fall under this provision. While acts like phishing may not be offences in themselves, they could be prosecuted where they form part of a wider deceptive scheme that meets the criteria of this section.

This is supplemented by the Criminal Justice (Offences Relating to Information Systems) Act 2017, which was introduced to address cybercrime and related offences such as unauthorised access to systems, data interference, and the use of malware. While the 2017 Act does not create a specific offence of identity theft, it recognises the seriousness of identity misuse by considering it as an aggravating factor for an offence under s.3 (Interference with information system without lawful authority) or s.4 (Interference with data without lawful authority). Section 8(4)(a) provides for this, dealing with offences such as data interference committed using false personal data, where the court is required to treat this as grounds for imposing a more severe penalty.

My Department and I are committed to continuing our active engagement and collaboration with our counterparts across Government, to ensure we address AI challenges and achieve our Department's mission of working for a safe, fair and inclusive Ireland.