Published on: 2026-04-25
Source: United Nations – United Nations –
An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
The development of technology should not be an end in itself – it is necessary to implement only those innovations that help people. At the same time, artificial intelligence is precisely the invention capable of making people’s lives better worldwide. Andrey Neznamov, head of Sberbank’s Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence Center, who was recently appointed to the UN Independent International Scientific Group on AI, is confident of this.
In an interview with Yevgenia Kleshcheva from the UN News Service, a lawyer and regulatory expert emphasized that participation in this body opens up the possibility for a broader and more balanced discussion of the future AI.
“This is a very important step on the way to creating a safe AI that will be a blessing for all. It is important to do this precisely at the international level,” noted Neznamov.
The UN General Assembly approved the composition of the Independent International Scientific Group on Artificial Intelligence for a three-year term. Neznamov was included among 40 specialists in the fields of machine learning, cybersecurity, healthcare, human rights, child development, data management, and other related disciplines. All members of the group work in a personal capacity, independent of any government bodies, private companies, or organizations.
The main task of the group is to summarize and analyze existing research concerning the possibilities and risks associated with artificial intelligence. The operation of the new structure is closely linked to another specialized mechanism of the UN system — the Global Dialogue on AI Governance.
The laws already exist
In an interview with the UN News Service, Neznamov noted that a significant portion of today’s risks is being reassessed, including due to the ignorance of existing legal mechanisms. Thus, many AI products automatically fall under the current sectoral legislation.
“We underestimate the power of already established norms. As a rule, I have noticed that in four out of five cases, the issues of implementing AI products are almost always covered by existing rules and norms,” explained Neznamov. “I truly believe that many risks associated with artificial intelligence are overestimated because they are considered as if in a vacuum, as if there is no legislation in the countries of the world.”
I truly believe that many risks associated with artificial intelligence are overestimated because they are considered as if in a vacuum
At the same time, he acknowledged that in some cases adaptation of legislation is required. For example, the current traffic regulations do not provide for the absence of a driver behind the wheel, so the emergence of driverless cars requires their updating.
Underestimated threats
Among the underestimated risks, the expert highlighted potential threats associated with the development of artificial general intelligence (AGI).
“When I started working on artificial intelligence, the conversation about the dangers of AGI getting out of control was almost always in the realm of science fiction,” Neznamov noted. As a lawyer, he had to consider all possible scenarios, but many interlocutors did not take such risks seriously and were not ready to discuss them. Now, however, the development of general AI is one of the main topics of discussion both among experts and the wider public. At the same time, according to the specialist, “perhaps we still do not assess these risks seriously enough.”
General rules
Another challenge named by Neznamov is the absence of a unified global approach to AI regulation, reminding that even regarding the Internet, humanity has not developed universal rules. At the same time, more active participation in international discussions by the countries of the Global South is necessary. The positions of developing countries, in my opinion as a Russian expert, often remain insufficiently represented. It is important to maintain a pluralism of opinions, including voices from all regions of the world and in different languages.
Neznamov emphasized that the task of the UN group, which includes specialists from many disciplines from various countries around the world, is not the immediate development of a global standard. The outcome of the work can be either a recommendation on international regulation or a conclusion about its unnecessary nature.
“Maybe, on the contrary, it will turn out that the national legislation is already handling it perfectly,” he noted.
Regulation Without Hindering Innovation
One of the key challenges is finding a balance between control and development. The situation is complicated by the speed with which artificial intelligence is changing.
“While you write the law, while you adopt it, while it comes into force, technology can change radically,” said Neznamov.
According to the expert, both excessive regulation and a complete lack of rules can equally negatively affect the development of AI.
While you write the law, while you adopt it, while it comes into force, technology can change radically…
Among the effective instruments, he named experimental legal regimes (“digital sandboxes”), which allow for quick testing of regulation within the framework of existing laws. The second example, which, according to the lawyer, works successfully in Russia, is “controlled self-regulation.”
“For example, there is the Russian National Ethics Code for AI. It has more than a thousand signatories. In fact, anyone who develops AI or implements it has signed this code, which sets certain ethical frameworks for how the field should develop in the absence of strict laws,” Neznamov explained. “The state has also signed this code. Within the document, there is a certain dialogue. If we understand that some ethical problem is too rigid, that it creates problems in society, or that developers have signed it but do not fulfill obligations, then the state will pass a law.”
The expert noted the consensus of the state and developers in Russia regarding ethical norms: the private sector is ready to voluntarily accept certain restrictions.
Anthropocentric approach
The key principle in Neznamov’s work is anthropocentrism. According to him, the idea of replacing humans with technologies often appears in public discourse.
“This is a very bad conversation because AI is needed to make human life better. Anthropocentrism means that a person is always at the center of any conversation about AI,” he noted.
Anthropocentrism means that at the center of any conversation about AI there is always a human.
Within the framework of his work at the Sberbank Center, Neznamov and his team assess the impact of technology on people’s lives, striving to minimize negative consequences and amplify positive ones. In the activities of the UN group, a regulation specialist brings an interdisciplinary approach that combines science, practice, and public perspective, as well as a “cautious techno-optimism”.
“It is very important that artificial intelligence must necessarily develop – let it be safe, let there be boundaries, but we have to do everything so that technologies reveal their potential for the benefit of people,” he said.
The first report of the expert group is expected at the July meeting of the Global Dialogue on AI governance.
Please note; This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of information. It represents an accurate report of what the source asserts and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.