{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-28T07:14:46.411Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"exam","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"contextual","evidence":"","year":"","response":"regulatory","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":3,"coverage":{"cases":3,"countries":2,"languages":5,"unknownLocation":1,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":0,"regulatory":3,"minors":0,"coreRelations":1,"contextualRelations":3,"mixedRelations":1,"unknownRelations":0,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":0},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"2020-amsterdam-university-student-says-proctorio-face-check-repeatedly-failed-to-detect-her-rights-body-finds-no-discrimination","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Voor bepaalde tentamens was het verplicht dat studenten op hun computer de proctoringsoftware (‘antispieksoftware’) van Proctorio installeerden'; 'De software maakt, in ieder geval tijdens het verificatieproces, gebruik van gezichtsdetectiealgoritmes om te beoordelen of een student in beeld is.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"In 2020/21 VU Amsterdam required students to run Proctorio proctoring software for some online exams; according to the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights the software used face-detection algorithms, at least during the verification process, to judge whether a student was in view.","causal_attribution":"The Institute's findings of fact about the software's use and function."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'de software had moeite om haar tijdens het verificatieproces te herkennen. Zij kreeg regelmatig de melding ‘face not found’ of ‘room too dark’.'; 'Deze gebeurtenissen leverden haar veel stress en een gevoel van onveiligheid op.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Het programma herkende haar gezicht niet en vroeg haar in \"een goed belichte ruimte\" te gaan zitten'; 'door met een lamp recht in haar gezicht te schijnen.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Ze kreeg dan meldingen zoals ‘face not found’ of ‘room too dark’.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The student says the software had trouble recognising her during the verification process, that she regularly received 'face not found' or 'room too dark' messages, lost a lot of time, shone a bright lamp into her face while taking exams, and that these events caused her much stress and a feeling of insecurity.","causal_attribution":"The student's own account, recited in the ruling as her position and given in interviews; the Institute did not accept that the problems exceeded other students' or were linked to her skin colour (c5)."},{"id":"c3","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Enkel bij het tentamen op 31 maart 2021 ging de setup bij verzoekster langzamer dan gemiddeld; zij had 3 minuten en 27 seconden nodig, terwijl de studenten gemiddeld 2 minuten en 22 seconden nodig hadden.'; 'dat de helpdesk verzoekster heeft geadviseerd om haar bril af te zetten. Nadat verzoekster dit advies heeft opgevolgd, komt zij binnen 8 seconden door de webcamcheck.'; 'De mogelijkheid dat een bril problemen geeft bij de webcamcheck, is een bekend probleem bij Proctorio'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"At an exam on 31 March 2021 the student's Proctorio setup took 3 minutes 27 seconds against an average of 2 minutes 22 seconds; after three attempts at the webcam check she was offered helpdesk chat, was advised to remove her glasses, and then passed the webcam check within eight seconds. The Institute described glasses causing webcam-check problems as a known Proctorio problem unrelated to her skin colour.","causal_attribution":"Findings of the Institute from log data and a chat transcript submitted by the university."},{"id":"c4","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'Het College heeft in het tussenoordeel van 7 december 2022 (oordeel 2022-146) vastgesteld dat er voldoende aanwijzingen zijn voor het vermoeden dat de VU de student gediscrimineerd heeft op grond van haar huidskleur.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'De universiteit krijgt tien weken de tijd om aan te tonen dat de software niet discrimineert.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"In an interim ruling of 7 December 2022 the Institute found sufficient indications for a presumption that the university had discriminated against the student on grounds of her skin colour by using Proctorio, and gave the university the opportunity to rebut it.","causal_attribution":"The Institute's interim ruling as recited in its final ruling and reported by AT5."},{"id":"c5","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'De VU heeft kunnen aantonen dat de student tijdens haar tentamens niet meer problemen heeft ondervonden dan andere studenten.'; 'niet veroorzaakt kan zijn door de proctoringsoftware, maar – zeer waarschijnlijk – wel door een instabiele internetverbinding.'; 'acht aannemelijk dat er geen noodzaak was voor verzoekster om langdurig een lamp op hinderlijke wijze in haar gezicht te laten schijnen'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"In its final ruling of 17 October 2023 the Institute found that the university had proved it did not discriminate against the student by using Proctorio: she had no more login, verification or restart problems than other students, a restart during the 31 March 2021 exam was very likely caused by an unstable internet connection, and it was plausible that she had no need to keep a lamp shining in her face for long periods.","causal_attribution":"The Institute's final findings; they dispute the student's account of the cause and extent of her problems."},{"id":"c6","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'verboden onderscheid op grond van ras gemaakt bij de klachtbehandeling.'; 'Uiteindelijk heeft het tot 11 mei 2022 geduurd voordat de klacht van de student door één van die instanties in behandeling genomen is.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The Institute found that the university had discriminated in handling the student's complaint: she first linked the software's poor functioning to her skin colour in a complaint of 1 October 2021, and it was 11 May 2022 before one of the bodies she was referred to took it up.","causal_attribution":"The Institute's ruling on complaint handling."},{"id":"c7","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'rekenen we het onszelf zeer aan dat de student zich onvoldoende gehoord heeft gevoeld in haar ervaring. Hiervoor bieden we onze excuses aan.'; 'Met de kennis van vandaag zullen wij opnieuw evalueren of, en zo ja hoe, het toetsen op afstand verantwoord kan worden ingezet.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"After the ruling the university apologised that the student had not felt sufficiently heard and said it would review its complaint procedures and re-evaluate whether remote proctoring can be used responsibly.","causal_attribution":"The university's own published statement."}],"effects":[{"label":"student reports stress, lost time and a lamp in her face after Proctorio's face check repeatedly failed to detect her","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://oordelen.mensenrechten.nl/oordeel/2023-111","kind":"official_decision","access":"read","language":"nl","translation_note":"Read in Dutch on 2026-10-28; the research agent (an AI) translated the passages for this record; quotations are kept in Dutch.","independence_group":"crm-ruling-2023-111"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://nos.nl/artikel/2436872-studente-dient-klacht-in-over-discriminerende-antispieksoftware","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"nl","translation_note":"Read in Dutch on 2026-10-28; the research agent (an AI) translated the passages for this record; quotations are kept in Dutch.","independence_group":"student-interview-volkskrant-2022"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.at5.nl/artikelen/218108/mensenrechtencollege-geeft-vu-student-gelijk-vermoeden-discriminatie-antispieksoftware-terecht","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"nl","translation_note":"Read in Dutch on 2026-10-28; the research agent (an AI) translated the passages for this record; quotations are kept in Dutch.","independence_group":"at5-2022-12-09"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://vu.nl/nl/nieuws/2023/uitspraak-college-voor-de-rechten-van-de-mens","kind":"institution_statement","access":"read","language":"nl","translation_note":"Read in Dutch on 2026-10-28; the research agent (an AI) translated the passages for this record; quotations are kept in Dutch.","independence_group":"vu-statement-2023-10-17"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["education","accessibility"],"unknowns":["How many of the student's eight Proctorio-monitored exams produced face-detection failures, and how long each took; the university's log data for four exams before February 2021 do not separate Proctorio's setup time.","Whether the face-detection model performed worse for the student because of her skin colour; Proctorio's audit was not submitted to the Institute.","Proctorio's own response to the student's account."],"geography":{"basis":"The exams were VU Amsterdam's online exams, and the complaint was decided by the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights in Utrecht. The ruling redacts where the student lived and does not say where she sat the exams, so her country is left unknown.","court_countries":["NL"],"event_countries":["NL"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as an institution's use of an automated face-detection check on a student: the Institute's ruling documents that the check failed her three times on one exam, and she reports repeated failures, lost time and stress. The ruling rejected her discrimination claim and found that the university mishandled her complaint; both are recorded.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-28"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The Institute's ruling says Proctorio used face-detection algorithms in the pre-exam verification check to judge whether a student was in view, and documents that on 31 March 2021 the check failed the student three times and passed her within eight seconds once she removed her glasses. The student says the check repeatedly reported 'face not found' or 'room too dark', which cost her time and caused stress. The Institute found the failures were not linked to her skin colour and not more frequent than other students' failures, so the extent of the system's failures and their cause remain disputed.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_decision_about"]},"name":"Amsterdam student says Proctorio exam software repeatedly failed to detect her face; rights body found no discrimination but faulted complaint handling","summary":"During the 2020/21 academic year, when exams at VU Amsterdam were held online because of the pandemic, some exams required students to run Proctorio proctoring software, which according to the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights used face-detection algorithms during a pre-exam webcam check to judge whether the student was in view. A master's student says the software had trouble recognising her, that she regularly received 'face not found' or 'room too dark' messages, lost time, shone a bright lamp into her face while taking exams, and experienced stress and a feeling of insecurity; she suspected the failures were linked to her dark skin and complained to the Institute in July 2022. In an interim ruling of 7 December 2022 the Institute found sufficient indications for a presumption of discrimination. In its final ruling of 17 October 2023 it found that the university had proved it had not discriminated against her by using Proctorio: on the exam where her setup took longer than average (31 March 2021), the webcam check failed three times and she passed within eight seconds after the helpdesk advised her to remove her glasses, a known Proctorio problem the Institute treated as unrelated to skin colour; a restart during that exam was very likely caused by an unstable internet connection; and it considered it plausible that she had no need to keep a lamp shining in her face for long periods. It found that the university had discriminated in handling her complaint, which took from 1 October 2021 to 11 May 2022 to be taken up. The university apologised that she had not felt heard.","incidentDate":"2020-01-01","incidentEndDate":"2021-05-26","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"year","exposurePattern":"repeated_interactions","reportedDate":"2022-07-15","aiSystem":"Proctorio online proctoring software used for some VU Amsterdam exams in 2020/21; according to the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights it used face-detection algorithms, at least during the pre-exam verification process, to judge whether a student was in view","aiProduct":"Proctorio","aiCompany":"Proctorio","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["psychological_distress"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The student says repeated face-detection failures at the exam webcam check cost her time, led her to shine a lamp into her face during exams and caused her stress and a feeling of insecurity. The Institute documented one exam where three failed checks delayed her start by about a minute against the average, but found she had no more problems than other students and that the problems were not linked to her skin colour.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"disputed","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":0,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One student, the complainant, who used the software herself. The Racism and Technology Center's fear, reported by NOS, that thousands of students with dark skin had problems is not a count.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","jurisdiction":"NL","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"regulatory_action","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://oordelen.mensenrechten.nl/oordeel/2023-111","primarySourceLabel":"Netherlands Institute for Human Rights, ruling 2023-111 on VU Amsterdam's use of Proctorio, 17 October 2023","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-28T03:05:48.901494+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-28T03:05:48.901494+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["proctorio","online-proctoring","face-detection","exam","university","netherlands","equality-body","complaint-handling"]},{"id":"2025-czech-constitutional-court-fines-lawyer-for-complaint-citing-non-existent-rulings-drafted-with-ai-tool","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"I.ÚS 3004/25 ze dne 1. 12. 2025; jako povinnému se ukládá pořádková pokuta ve výši 25 000 Kč; Pokutu uložil pouze ve čtvrtině zákonného rozpětí, neboť se povinný hrubého ztížení postupu řízení před Ústavním soudem dopustil poprvé a vadu podání lze ještě odstranit.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"On 1 December 2025 the presiding judge of a Constitutional Court chamber fined the lawyer 25,000 crowns for grossly obstructing proceedings, at a quarter of the statutory range because it was a first failing and the defect could still be remedied.","causal_attribution":"The fine responded to the filing; the order attributes the defects to the lawyer's failure to verify presumed AI output."},{"id":"c2","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"V ústavní stížnosti argumentoval celkem 12 rozhodnutími Ústavního soudu a Evropského soudu pro lidská práva. Po pečlivém prostudování ústavní stížnosti Ústavní soud zjistil, že podstatná část z těchto rozhodnutí vůbec neexistuje a část je povinným hrubě dezinterpretována.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The complaint argued from 12 decisions of the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights, a substantial part of which did not exist and part of which were grossly misinterpreted.","causal_attribution":"Established by the court's own verification."},{"id":"c3","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"To vede Ústavní soud k domněnce, že povinný generoval podání pomocí některého z modelů umělé inteligence, poté však neověřil existenci citovaných rozhodnutí a správnost argumentace, resp. citace.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The court found signs of AI use in the complaint and presumed that the lawyer had generated it with an AI model and then failed to verify the citations and argument.","causal_attribution":"The order records the court's presumption of AI generation; the lawyer's confirmation is a separate claim (c4)."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Že opravdu použil při sepisování stížnosti umělou inteligenci, potvrdil INFO.CZ samotný advokát, který nad celou situací vyjádřil lítost.; Přiznává, že jeho chybou bylo, že výstup nedostatečně kontroloval a spolehl se na to, že uvedená judikatura odpovídá.; placený profesionální model AI, který nabízí některá z velkých společností provozujících komplexní právní informační systémy","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The lawyer confirmed to INFO.CZ that AI was used to write the complaint, said the output was not checked enough, and described the tool as a paid professional AI model from a large legal information system provider.","causal_attribution":"The lawyer attributes the false citations to the AI tool's output that was not checked."},{"id":"c5","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"Stěžovateli, prostřednictvím jeho právního zástupce, souběžně Ústavní soud zasílá výzvu k odstranění vad ústavní stížnosti, aby stěžovatel v důsledku postupu svého právního zástupce neutrpěl procesní újmu.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"I.ÚS 3004/25 ze dne 30. 1. 2026; Ústavní stížnost se odmítá.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The court invited the client to remedy the complaint so that the client would suffer no procedural harm, and later rejected the complaint as manifestly unfounded on 30 January 2026.","causal_attribution":"No source connects the rejection to the AI-generated citations."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Podle zdrojů INFO.CZ se kontrolní rada ČAK tímto konkrétním případem již zabývá. A to přestože se advokát soudu omluvil, pokutu zaplatil a klienta se jeho selhání nedotkne, neboť od ÚS dostal prostor na nápravu.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"Ústavní soud ocenil následný přístup advokáta, který pokutu obratem uhradil a zaslal omluvu.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"}],"assertion":"The lawyer apologised and paid the fine, and the Czech Bar Association's supervisory board was reported to be examining the case.","causal_attribution":"Consequence of the fine; the bar examination rests on INFO.CZ's unnamed sources."},{"id":"c7","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Pokud jde o využití AI pro přípravu podání bez kontroly zdrojů, může se skutečně jednat o kárné provinění advokáta; Ve svých důsledcích by to mohlo vést k postihování advokáta obecně za podání, které soud vyhodnotí jako nekvalitní nebo s nesprávně aplikovanou judikaturou","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"The Czech Bar Association's president said using AI for a filing without checking sources may be a disciplinary offence, while the bar expressed reservations about courts fining lawyers for filings they judge to be of poor quality.","causal_attribution":"Context and a qualification of the sanction, not a causal claim."}],"effects":[{"label":"fined 25,000 crowns by the Constitutional Court over non-existent and misinterpreted rulings in an AI-drafted complaint","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"case reported to be under examination by the bar association's supervisory board","claim_id":"c6","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://nalus.usoud.cz/Search/GetText.aspx?sz=1-3004-25_1","kind":"court_decision","access":"read","language":"cs","translation_note":"Read in Czech on 2026-10-26 (HTTP 200); quoted passages were translated by the research agent (an AI). Order dated 1 December 2025 in the NALUS database; the client and lawyer are named in the order and are not reproduced here.","independence_group":"czech-constitutional-court-order-i-us-3004-25-dec-2025"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://nalus.usoud.cz/Search/GetText.aspx?sz=1-3004-25_2","kind":"court_decision","access":"read","language":"cs","translation_note":"Read in Czech on 2026-10-26 (HTTP 200); quoted passages were translated by the research agent (an AI). Resolution dated 30 January 2026 in the NALUS database.","independence_group":"czech-constitutional-court-resolution-i-us-3004-25-jan-2026"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.info.cz/zpravodajstvi-a-komentare/ustavni-soud-pokuta-advokat-umela-inteligence-ai","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"cs","translation_note":"Read in Czech on 2026-10-26 (HTTP 200); quoted passages were translated by the research agent (an AI). INFO.CZ broke the story and interviewed the fined lawyer; later reports relay its interview.","independence_group":"info-cz-lawyer-interview-dec-2025"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://www.info.cz/zpravodajstvi-a-komentare/pokuta-advokat-ai-justice-cak-vyhrady","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"cs","translation_note":"Read in Czech on 2026-10-26 (HTTP 200); quoted passages were translated by the research agent (an AI). Follow-up article with statements of the Czech Bar Association president and the presidents of the two top courts.","independence_group":"info-cz-bar-reaction-dec-2025"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://advokatnidenik.cz/2025/12/12/generativni-ai-prinesla-k-soudum-take-halucinace-ai-v-pravnich-podanich/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"cs","translation_note":"Read in Czech on 2026-10-26 (HTTP 200); quoted passages were translated by the research agent (an AI). Bar Association journal article credited to the ČTK news agency.","independence_group":"ctk-advokatni-denik-dec-2025"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use"],"contexts":["justice","work"],"unknowns":["The name of the AI tool and its provider; the lawyer declined to name it.","The date the complaint was filed (INFO.CZ says it reached the court in October 2025).","The outcome of the Czech Bar Association supervisory board's examination, if any."],"geography":{"basis":"The complaint was filed with, and the fine imposed by, the Czech Constitutional Court; the reports describe the lawyer as practising in Prague. Residence is not recorded as a country of the affected person.","court_countries":["CZ"],"event_countries":["CZ"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a concrete adverse consequence of AI use: the Constitutional Court's order fines a lawyer for a complaint whose non-existent citations it presumes were generated with an AI model, and the lawyer confirmed using a paid legal AI tool without checking its output.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-26"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The Constitutional Court's order finds that a substantial part of the 12 decisions cited in the complaint did not exist, identifies signs of AI-generated text, and presumes the lawyer generated the filing with an AI model without verifying it; the lawyer confirmed to INFO.CZ that an AI tool, a paid professional model from a legal information system provider, was used and that its output was not checked enough. The tool's output reached the lawyer and went into the complaint (communicated_with), and the court read those invented authorities and fined the lawyer for them (informed_decision_about). The provider is not named.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with","informed_decision_about"]},"name":"Czech Constitutional Court fines a lawyer 25,000 crowns over a complaint citing non-existent rulings; the lawyer says a paid legal AI tool drafted it","summary":"On 1 December 2025 the presiding judge of a chamber of the Czech Constitutional Court fined a Prague lawyer 25,000 crowns (a quarter of the statutory maximum) for grossly obstructing proceedings. The lawyer had filed a constitutional complaint, for a client refused a temporary residence permit, that argued from 12 decisions of the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights; the court found that a substantial part of them did not exist and part were grossly misinterpreted. The order says the complaint showed signs of generative AI and that the court presumed the lawyer had generated it with an AI model and then failed to verify the citations. The lawyer confirmed to INFO.CZ that an AI tool was used, described it as a paid professional model from a legal information system provider, said the output was not checked enough, and expressed regret. The court invited the client to correct the complaint so that the client would suffer no procedural harm; the complaint was later rejected as manifestly unfounded on 30 January 2026. INFO.CZ reported on 10 December 2025 that the lawyer had apologised and paid the fine and that the Czech Bar Association's supervisory board was examining the case.","incidentDate":"2025-12-01","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2025-12-03","aiSystem":"A paid professional AI model offered by a legal information system provider, used to draft a constitutional complaint (provider not named; the court inferred generative AI from the text and the lawyer confirmed its use)","aiProduct":"Unidentified legal research tool","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["financial_loss","legal_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"According to the Constitutional Court's order, a lawyer whose complaint cited non-existent and misinterpreted rulings, which the court presumed were AI-generated and the lawyer says came from a paid legal AI tool, was fined 25,000 crowns; INFO.CZ reported that the bar association's supervisory board was examining the case.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"established","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":0,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: the lawyer fined by the Constitutional Court. The court invited the client to remedy the complaint so that the client would suffer no procedural harm, and INFO.CZ reports that the client was not affected, so the client is not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"CZ","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"regulatory_action","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://nalus.usoud.cz/Search/GetText.aspx?sz=1-3004-25_1","primarySourceLabel":"Czech Constitutional Court, order I. US 3004/25 imposing a disciplinary fine (1 December 2025)","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-26T03:09:43.763021+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-26T03:09:43.763021+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["czechia","legal-profession","hallucinated-citations","court-fine","constitutional-court"]},{"id":"2026-switzerland-grok-generated-sexist-insults-about-finance-minister-criminal-complaint-bern-investigation","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Am 10. März hat es auch eine Schweizer Politikerin erwischt: Bundesrätin Karin Keller-Sutter. Es war der Schweizer Peter P.*, der Grok im Verlauf einer generellen «Roast»-Diskussion mit einem Prompt gezielt animierte'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Ein Nutzer hatte den Bot am 10. März gezielt zu Beleidigungen gegen Keller-Sutter aufgefordert.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'A user of the social network X prompted the AI Grok chatbot to conjure insults against the minister.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"On 10 March 2026 a Swiss X user, during a roast thread, prompted Grok to attack Federal Councillor Karin Keller-Sutter in hard street slang.","causal_attribution":"CH Media's report of the prompt from the post it saw; Keystone-SDA relays Sonntagsblick's report of a user prompting Grok. The prompter's identity is a pseudonym in the sources and is not recorded here."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Mit vulgären Beschimpfungen. Mit beleidigenden Körper- und Charakterangriffen. Mit abwertender und sexualisierter Sprache.' and 'Die sexualisierten Begriffe von Groks Entgleisungen sind im Screenshot des Posts auf X verpixelt.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Grok reagierte mit sexistischen und beleidigenden Aussagen, die öffentlich einsehbar und teilbar waren'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Grok replied on X with vulgar insults, attacks on her body and character, and degrading, sexualised language about Keller-Sutter, and the reply was publicly visible and shareable.","causal_attribution":"CH Media's description of Grok's post from a screenshot; both articles come from the same media group, so the claim rests on one reporting chain."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Keller-Sutter erfuhr am Folgetag davon. Kurz darauf wurde der Beitrag gelöscht.' and '«Es war eine harmlose technische Übung, um zu sehen, was mit diesem Grok möglich ist»'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Er löschte seinen «Roast»-Prompt und auch die Antwort von Grok.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Keller-Sutter learned of the post the next day, and the user deleted his prompt and Grok's reply shortly afterwards; the user later told Tamedia it was a harmless technical exercise.","causal_attribution":"CH Media reporting; the user's comment is his own account relayed from Tamedia."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'the Bern public prosecutor's office has opened an investigation over insult and defamation.' and 'The minister’s criminal complaint targets “unknown persons”.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"'le Ministère public bernois a ouvert une enquête pour injures et diffamation.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"'Inzwischen hat die Bundesrätin Strafanzeige wegen Verleumdung und Beschimpfung eingereicht.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Keller-Sutter filed a criminal complaint against unknown persons, and the Bern public prosecutor's office confirmed to Keystone-SDA that it had opened an investigation for insult and defamation.","causal_attribution":"The prosecutor's confirmation to Keystone-SDA and statements by Keller-Sutter's spokesperson; the investigation has reached no reported finding."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'«Solcher Frauenhass darf nicht als normal oder akzeptabel empfunden werden», wurde Hollenstein zitiert.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'«Der Verbreitung solcher sexistischer Texte muss eine Grenze gesetzt werden'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Keller-Sutter's spokesperson said such misogyny must not be seen as normal or acceptable, and the finance department said the spread of such sexist texts must be limited.","causal_attribution":"Official statements by the minister's spokesperson and department."}],"effects":[{"label":"sexist and degrading insults about a named minister generated and posted publicly by a chatbot","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"},{"label":"criminal complaint and prosecutor investigation for insult and defamation","claim_id":"c4","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.watson.ch/schweiz/bundesrat/406055717-ki-chatbot-grok-von-elon-musk-beschimpft-keller-sutter-prozess-droht","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"de","translation_note":"Read in German on 2026-10-12 from the publisher page (full article text); the research agent (an AI) translated the passages relied on into English for this record, and no human translator reviewed them. The article credits bzbasel.ch (CH Media).","independence_group":"ch-media"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.aargauerzeitung.ch/schweiz/keller-sutter-reicht-strafanzeige-gegen-elon-musks-ki-grok-ein-ld.4147350","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"de","translation_note":"Read in German on 2026-10-12 from the publisher page (full article text); the research agent (an AI) translated the passages relied on into English for this record, and no human translator reviewed them. Same newsroom group as s1 (CH Media); it relays Tamedia for the complaint and the user's comment.","independence_group":"ch-media"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/various/ai-chatbot-criminal-investigation-following-karin-keller-sutters-complaint/91249480","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-10-12 from the publisher page; swissinfo.ch states that it translates selected news agency copy with automatic translation tools and that a journalist then reviews the translation, so the English text is a reviewed machine translation of a Keystone-SDA report. No further translation by the research agent (an AI) was needed.","independence_group":"keystone-sda"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://www.swissinfo.ch/fre/chatbot-dia%3aenqu%c3%aate-p%c3%a9nale-apr%c3%a8s-la-plainte-de-karin-keller-sutter/91248423","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"fr","translation_note":"Read in French on 2026-10-12 from the publisher page (Keystone-ATS copy); the research agent (an AI) translated the passages relied on into English for this record, and no human translator reviewed them. Same agency as s3.","independence_group":"keystone-sda"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["public_services","everyday_life"],"unknowns":["The full text of Grok's reply as posted; the sources quote parts and describe the rest from a screenshot.","How many people saw or shared the reply before it was deleted.","Whether the investigation has identified anyone or reached any decision, and whether xAI or X responded.","Keller-Sutter's own description of any personal effect; only her spokesperson and department are quoted.","Where the user was when he prompted Grok."],"geography":{"basis":"Keller-Sutter is a member of the Swiss Federal Council and head of its finance department, the office through which the reply targeted her, and the Bern public prosecutor's office opened the investigation. The sources call the user Swiss but do not say where he prompted Grok or where the reply was posted from, so the event country is left unknown; the investigation is not a court proceeding.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":["CH"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published on CH Media's description, from a screenshot, of Grok's own reply on X insulting Federal Councillor Keller-Sutter in sexist and degrading terms after a user asked for a roast, together with Keystone-SDA's report that the Bern prosecutor opened an investigation for insult and defamation on her complaint. The generated reply is the AI output and the public abuse of the named minister is the reported harm. The case adds a criminal investigation by a public prosecutor as a legal outcome. Claims stay reported because each rests on one reporting chain or on official statements.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-12"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"watson (CH Media) describes Grok's own reply on X, from a screenshot of the post: after a user asked for a hard street-slang roast of the minister, Grok answered that it would and wrote vulgar insults, attacks on her body and character, and degrading, sexualised language about her (\"Mit vulgären Beschimpfungen. Mit beleidigenden Körper- und Charakterangriffen. Mit abwertender und sexualisierter Sprache.\"). The Aargauer Zeitung reports that Grok's statements were publicly visible and shareable, and Keystone-SDA reports that a user prompted Grok to produce insults against the minister. The generated reply is the material her criminal complaint for insult and defamation concerns.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"Switzerland: Grok posted sexist insults about Finance Minister Karin Keller-Sutter on X at a user's prompt; her complaint led to a criminal investigation","summary":"On 10 March 2026, according to CH Media reporting published by watson, a Swiss X user taking part in a \"roast\" thread asked xAI's chatbot Grok to attack Federal Councillor Karin Keller-Sutter, Switzerland's finance minister, in hard street slang. Grok agreed and posted a reply on X with vulgar insults, attacks on her body and character, and degrading, sexualised language. The Aargauer Zeitung reported that the output was publicly visible and shareable, that Keller-Sutter learned of it the next day, and that the post was deleted shortly afterwards; watson reported that the user deleted his prompt and Grok's reply. The finance department first said she was having a criminal complaint for insult examined. Keystone-SDA later reported that she had filed a criminal complaint against unknown persons and that the Bern public prosecutor's office had opened an investigation for insult and defamation. Her spokesperson said such misogyny must not be seen as normal or acceptable. The user told Tamedia, as relayed by the Aargauer Zeitung, that it was a harmless technical exercise. No outcome of the investigation is reported.","incidentDate":"2026-03-10","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-03-15","aiSystem":"Grok, the xAI chatbot that replies to users on X, prompted by an X user during a \"roast\" thread","aiProduct":"Grok","aiCompany":"xAI","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Grok's reply, posted publicly on X, subjected Keller-Sutter to sexist and degrading insults that the FDP co-president who discussed it with her called a sexist insult of the ugliest and most vulgar kind. Keller-Sutter filed a criminal complaint for insult and defamation, and her spokesperson described the content as misogyny. Her own description of any personal effect is not reported.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: Karin Keller-Sutter, the target of Grok's reply, who filed the complaint. Other politicians targeted in other users' roast threads are not part of this event and are not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"CH","platformType":"chatbot","outcomeType":"investigation_opened","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.watson.ch/schweiz/bundesrat/406055717-ki-chatbot-grok-von-elon-musk-beschimpft-keller-sutter-prozess-droht","primarySourceLabel":"watson, 15 March 2026: KI-Chatbot Grok von Elon Musk beschimpft Keller-Sutter, Prozess droht","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-12T03:13:18.439789+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-12T03:13:18.439789+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["grok","x","chatbot","insult","defamation","misogyny","switzerland","criminal-complaint","public-official","made-claim-about"]}]}