Alnadwah
International Conference on Syariah, Law and Science (CFORSJ i-CONF) - CFORSJ Procedia

المسؤولية المدنية في عصر الطب الرقمي لأخطاء الروبوتات في العمليات الجراحية عن بُعد: تحليل قانوني مقارن في دولتي الإمارات وماليزيا

Date Published : 15 December 2025

Contributors

Yaser Mohsen Shayea Abdullah

Author

Keywords

Modern technologies robotics medical surgery التقنيات الحديثة الروبوتات الجراحة الطبية

Proceeding

Vol. 3 No. 1 (2025): CFORSJ Procedia

Track

Article

License

Copyright (c) 2025 YASER MOHSEN SHAYEA ABDULLAH;

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Abstract

This study examines civil liability arising from errors committed by advanced robots in remote surgical procedures through a comparative analytical study of Emirati and Malaysian legislation. It aims to analyze and evaluate the current legal framework for civil liability for medical errors caused by surgical robots in both countries, and to conduct a comprehensive comparison to identify the strengths and weaknesses of each legal system. The research problem lies in the difficulty of determining civil liability when a medical error occurs during the use of robots, whether due to a software malfunction or human error. World Health Organization statistics indicate that 7% of medical errors in robotic surgeries are due to technical or software malfunctions. The study's significance lies in presenting a new scientific model that integrates law and medical technology, guiding legislators toward developing legislation capable of protecting patients' rights and ensuring the accountability of various parties (surgeon, hospital, manufacturer). The study employs a comparative analytical approach, utilizing a mixed-methods research strategy that includes descriptive legal analysis, legislative comparison, and critical analysis of legal texts and judicial rulings in both countries. The study is expected to reveal legislative gaps in addressing robotic errors, highlight the differences in legal approaches between the two systems, and identify applicable best practices. Recommendations include developing a specific law on liability for medical technology errors, establishing specialized committees to assess robotic errors, setting clear standards for distributing responsibility among different parties, and fostering international cooperation to develop unified standards governing the use of advanced robots in remote surgical procedures.

الملخص

تتناول هذه الدراسة المسؤولية المدنية الناجمة عن أخطاء الروبوت المتقدم في العمليات الجراحية عن بُعد من خلال دراسة تحليلية مقارنة بين التشريعين الإماراتي والماليزي، حيث تهدف إلى تحليل وتقييم الإطار القانوني الحالي للمسؤولية المدنية عن الأخطاء الطبية الناجمة عن الروبوتات الجراحية في كلا البلدين، وإجراء مقارنة شاملة لتحديد نقاط القوة والضعف في كل نظام قانوني. تبرز مشكلة البحث في صعوبة تحديد المسؤولية المدنية عند وقوع خطأ طبي أثناء استخدام الروبوتات، سواء كان ناتجًا عن خلل برمجي أو خطأ في التحكم البشري، حيث أظهرت إحصائيات منظمة الصحة العالمية أن 7% من الأخطاء الطبية في العمليات الجراحية الروبوتية كانت نتيجة لخلل تقني أو برمجي. تكمن أهمية الدراسة في تقديم نموذج علمي جديد يجمع بين القانون والتكنولوجيا الطبية من جهة، وتوجيه المشرعين نحو تطوير تشريعات قادرة على حماية حقوق المرضى وضمان مساءلة الأطراف المختلفة (الجراح، المستشفى، الشركة المصنعة) من جهة أخرى. اعتمدت الدراسة على المنهج المقارن التحليلي، متبعة استراتيجية استقصاء مختلطة تشمل التحليل القانوني الوصفي والمقارنة التشريعية والتحليل النقدي للنصوص القانونية والأحكام القضائية في كلا البلدين. من المتوقع أن تكشف الدراسة عن الفجوات التشريعية في التعامل مع الأخطاء الروبوتية، وإظهار التباين في المقاربات القانونية بين النظامين، وتحديد أفضل الممارسات القابلة للتطبيق. تتضمن التوصيات تطوير قانون خاص بالمسؤولية عن الأخطاء التكنولوجية الطبية، وإنشاء لجان متخصصة لتقييم الأخطاء الروبوتية، ووضع معايير واضحة لتوزيع المسؤولية بين الأطراف المختلفة، بالإضافة إلى ضرورة التعاون الدولي لوضع معايير موحدة تحكم استخدام الروبوتات المتقدمة في العمليات الجراحية عن بُعد.

References

Arnaud, F. (2023). Medical civil liability in electronic healthcare. French Law Journal, 45(2), 156–189.
Bhattacharya, D. (2022). Liability analysis of digital medical platforms for medical errors committed by physicians. Indian Journal of Law and Technology, 18(3), 245–278.
Baydoun, M. A. (2023). Civil liability of physicians under UAE legislation. Sharjah Journal of Legal Sciences, 20(1), 89–134.
Rahhal, M. T., & Barahliya, Z. (2023). Legal rules of medical liability under Algerian legislation. Algerian Journal of Law, 61(4), 201–235.
Abduljabbar, F. M. (2022). Civil liability of physicians in telemedicine: A comparative study. Journal of Babylon University for Legal Sciences, 13(2), 567–612.
Al-Qadi, R. (2024). Civil liability for medical errors in electronic healthcare. Journal of Legal and Economic Sciences, 66(1), 321–370.
Al-Kamali, S. (2023). The impact of relying on artificial intelligence in providing healthcare services: An applied study. UAE Journal of Legal Studies, 15(3), 445–492.
Novento, E. (2024). Legal protection for patients as victims of medical malpractice by physicians in telemedicine services. Indonesian Journal of Health Law, 9(1), 78–115.
Hansard, L. W., & Kwashi, R. (2023). Medical professional liability and risks of electronic healthcare. American Journal of Medical Risk Management, 43(2), 112–145.
Al-Sanhouri, A. A. (2020). Al-Wasit in explaining the civil law: General theory of obligations (Vol. 1). Cairo: Dar Al-Nahda Al-Arabia.
Al-Sharqawi, G. (2019). General theory of obligations: Book one – Sources of obligation. Cairo: Dar Al-Nahda Al-Arabia.
Al-Aboudi, A. (2019). Explanation of the UAE Medical Liability Law. Dubai: University Library.
Al-Fadl, M. (2018). Civil liability for medical acts: A comparative study. Beirut: Al-Halabi Legal Publications.
Markos, S. (2021). Al-Wafi in explaining civil law obligations: Vol. 2 – Tort and civil liability. Cairo: Dar Al-Kutub Al-Qanuniyya.
International Academy for Mediation and Arbitration. (2024). Legal aspects of medical robots. Retrieved November 15, 2025, from https://www.iamaeg.net/ar/publications/articles/legal-aspects-of-medical-robots
European Center for Strategic and Security Studies. (2024). Artificial intelligence in the medical sector: Between innovation and risks. Retrieved November 18, 2025, from https://www.ecssr.ae
United Arab Emirates. (2016). Federal Law No. (4) of 2016 on Medical Liability. Official Gazette, Issue 598.
United Arab Emirates. (1985). Federal Law No. (5) of 1985 on Civil Transactions. Official Gazette, Issue 158.
Abbott, R. (2020). The Reasonable Computer: Disrupting the Paradigm of Tort Liability. George Washington Law Review, 86(1), 1-45.
Abdul Rashid, R. (2016). Medical Negligence Liability Under Malaysian Law. Malayan Law Journal, 3, 45-67.
Ahmad, A., & Ibrahim, M. (2019). Regulating Medical Devices in Malaysia: Challenges and Opportunities. Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences, 26(4), 56-72.
Al Marzouqi, A. H. (2021). Legal Challenges of Robotic Surgery in the UAE Healthcare System. Emirates Law Journal, 12(2), 89-115.
Balkin, J. M. (2015). The Path of Robotics Law. California Law Review Circuit, 6, 45-60.
Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (8th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Bertolini, A. (2020). Artificial Intelligence and Civil Liability. European Parliament Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs, Study PE 621.926.
Bryson, J. J., Diamantis, M. E., & Grant, T. D. (2017). Of, For, and By the People: The Legal Lacuna of Synthetic Persons. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 25(3), 273-291.
Calo, R. (2015). Robotics and the Lessons of Cyberlaw. California Law Review, 103(3), 513-563.
Chen, P., & Wong, K. (2020). Human-Robot Interaction in Telesurgery: Legal and Ethical Implications. Asian Journal of Medical Technology, 15(4), 234-256.
Contracts Act 1950 (Revised 1974) (Act 136). Malaysia: Commissioner of Law Revision, Malaysia.
Department of Health – Abu Dhabi (DoH). (2022). Medical Device Errors Report 2022. Abu Dhabi: DoH.
Dubai Health Authority (DHA). (2021). Medical Device Regulation Guidelines. Dubai: DHA.
European Parliament. (2017). Civil Law Rules on Robotics: European Parliament Resolution of 16 February 2017 with Recommendations to the Commission on Civil Law Rules on Robotics (2015/2103(INL)). Brussels: European Parliament.
GCC Health Council. (2021). Legal Framework for Medical Robotics in GCC Countries: Gaps and Challenges. Riyadh: GCC Health Council.
Gerke, S., Minssen, T., & Cohen, G. (2020). Ethical and Legal Challenges of Artificial Intelligence-Driven Healthcare. In Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare (pp. 295-336). Cambridge, MA: Academic Press.
Hallevy, G. (2015). Liability for Crimes Involving Artificial Intelligence Systems. London: Springer International Publishing.
International Federation of Robotics (IFR). (2021). World Robotics 2021: Service Robots Report. Frankfurt: IFR.
Kilbertus, N., Gascon, A., Kusner, M., Veale, M., Gummadi, K., & Weller, A. (2017). Blind Justice: Fairness with Encrypted Sensitive Attributes. In Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Machine Learning (pp. 2630-2639).
Latifi, R. (Ed.). (2018). The Modern Hospital: Patients Centered, Disease Based, Research Oriented, Technology Driven. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Lee, S. W., & Detta, A. (2018). Medical Negligence: Common Law and Statutory Perspectives in Malaysia. International Journal of Law and Management, 60(2), 463-476.
Medical Device Act 2012 (Act 737). Putrajaya: Ministry of Health Malaysia.
Medical Device Authority (MDA). (2020). Guidance Document: Medical Device Registration in Malaysia (3rd ed.). Cyberjaya: Medical Device Authority.
Ministry of Health Malaysia. (2015). Medical Device Act 2012: Implementation Guidelines and Standards. Putrajaya: MOH.
Ministry of Health Malaysia. (2023). Annual Report on Medical Errors and Patient Safety 2023. Putrajaya: MOH.
Müller, V. C., & Bostrom, N. (2016). Future Progress in Artificial Intelligence: A Survey of Expert Opinion. In V. C. Müller (Ed.), Fundamental Issues of Artificial Intelligence (pp. 555-572). Cham: Springer.
Pagallo, U. (2018). Vital, Sophia, and Co.—The Quest for the Legal Personhood of Robots. Information, 9(9), 230-248. https://doi.org/10.3390/info9090230
Pasquale, F. (2015). The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Price, W. N. (2017). Regulating Black-Box Medicine. Michigan Law Review, 116(3), 421-474.
Samanta, A., & Samanta, J. (2019). Medical Law (3rd ed.). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Solaiman, S. M. (2017). Legal Personality of Robots, Corporations, Idols and Chimpanzees: A Quest for Legitimacy. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 25(2), 155-179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-016-9192-3
UAE Ministry of Health and Prevention (MOHAP). (2022). Standards for Medical Device Registration and Approval. Abu Dhabi: MOHAP.
Vladeck, D. C. (2014). Machines Without Principals: Liability Rules and Artificial Intelligence. Washington Law Review, 89(1), 117-150.
World Health Organization (WHO). (2022). Patient Safety and Medical Device Errors: Global Report 2022. Geneva: WHO.

Downloads

How to Cite

Yaser Mohsen Shayea Abdullah, Y. M. S. A. (2025). المسؤولية المدنية في عصر الطب الرقمي لأخطاء الروبوتات في العمليات الجراحية عن بُعد: تحليل قانوني مقارن في دولتي الإمارات وماليزيا. International Conference on Syariah, Law and Science (CFORSJ I-CONF) - CFORSJ Procedia, 3(1), 377-395. https://alnadwah.usim.edu.my/cforsjprocedia/paper/view/172