Nataliia Fursenko, PhD in Law
Expert in International and Migration Law | Associate Professor | Researcher in AI Governance and LegalTech | Author of the Legal Bridge Method | Developer of LegalPilot and AI Legal Relocation Assistant | Founder of LegalPilot Academy
Editorial Note
The editorial team invited Nataliia Fursenko to provide an expert analysis of the development of international AI regulation, the transformation of the legal profession, and new approaches to the use of LegalTech in cross-border legal environments.
Journalist: Artificial intelligence is already influencing law, public administration and international relations. What do you see as the main legal challenge arising from its development?
Nataliia Fursenko:
I see the main challenge not so much in the technological complexity of artificial intelligence itself, but in the need to adapt existing legal mechanisms to a fundamentally different model of decision-making.
Traditional law primarily regulates the activities of actors whose actions can be identified, assessed and linked to specific legal responsibility. Algorithmic systems create a more complex structure: a decision may be generated on the basis of large datasets, machine-learning processes and mechanisms that are not always transparent to the end user.
This raises questions of fundamental legal importance: Who bears responsibility for the consequences of using an AI system? How can the right to challenge an automated decision be guaranteed? To what extent can a decision be explained? And what mechanisms of judicial review should apply?
Therefore, the development of AI Governance should be viewed as the emergence of a new level of legal regulation, in which technological innovation must be reconciled with the principles of the rule of law, legal certainty, proportionality and the protection of fundamental rights.
Journalist: To what extent are existing international approaches capable of addressing these challenges?
Nataliia Fursenko:
We are already witnessing the emergence of a certain international normative consensus, although it would be premature to speak of a single global regulatory system.
For example, the EU AI Act establishes a risk-based regulatory model and differentiates requirements according to the potential impact of AI systems.
The OECD AI Principles provide international guidance concerning trustworthy and safe AI, transparency, accountability and human oversight.
The UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence develops the human-rights and ethical dimension, emphasizing the protection of human dignity, human rights and social justice.
The U.S. NIST AI Risk Management Framework, in turn, provides a practical framework for identifying and managing risks throughout the lifecycle of AI systems.
Although these instruments differ in their legal nature, they share a number of common concepts: human oversight, transparency, accountability, safety, risk management and the protection of fundamental rights.
These overlapping principles can provide a foundation for further international legal interoperability.
Journalist: Why is a comparison of the United States, Europe and Ukraine particularly interesting in this context?
Nataliia Fursenko:
Because these represent three different legal and technological environments, each of which allows us to examine a distinct aspect of the problem.
The United States represents a model in which technological innovation and the private sector play an exceptionally significant role in the development of artificial intelligence.
The European Union demonstrates a more institutionalized approach, in which AI development is directly connected with risk regulation and the protection of fundamental rights.
Ukraine is particularly interesting from the perspective of digital transformation, the development of electronic government services and the adaptation of national legislation to European legal standards.
For me, this is primarily a comparative-law issue. The objective should not be to place these models in opposition to one another, but to identify which elements of each can be made compatible and which legal mechanisms can facilitate cross-border interaction.
This is precisely where significant space for the development of international AI Governance emerges.
Journalist: What role, in your view, can your projects — LegalPilot, LegalPilot Academy and the AI Legal Relocation Assistant — play in this process?
Nataliia Fursenko:
I view these projects as an applied continuation of my research in international law, comparative law, AI Governance and LegalTech.
Their purpose is not simply to digitize individual legal procedures. The more fundamental objective is to explore how modern technologies can be used within legal systems while preserving legal accountability, human oversight and requirements for the reliability of legal information.
LegalPilot Academy is a research and educational platform bringing together international law, LegalTech, AI Governance and comparative legal studies.
LegalPilot and the AI Legal Relocation Assistant are practical legal-navigation tools primarily designed to structure complex cross-border legal information.
At the core of this system is the Legal Bridge Method, a methodology I developed for analyzing legal situations arising at the intersection of different national and international legal regimes.
The projects therefore form an integrated research ecosystem:
scientific methodology → education → technological application → practical legal navigation.
In my view, this transition from a theoretical concept to a verifiable practical tool is one of the most important directions in the development of contemporary legal scholarship.
