Legislative Inertia in the Era of New Technologies: Biocomputing as a Symptom of the Systemic Dysfunction of Law

Hanna Spasowska

Abstract


The article addresses the issue of legislative inertia as an inherent feature of the normative system in the context of groundbreaking technological innovations. Biocomputing, i.e., information processing with the use of biological systems, serves as a case study demonstrating the inadequacy of existing legal categories for the phenomena that need regulation. The analysis covers EU law and Polish law and identifies four fundamental normative gaps: the lack of an appropriate legal category for the biocomputer, the inadequacy of the biosafety regime, the conflict of intellectual property regimes, and the unresolved issue of genetic data as a carrier of computational information. The study puts forward proposals for the law as it should stand concerning the inevitable lag of law, including the proposal for a framework law, ratification of the Oviedo Convention, establishment of an interdisciplinary expert council, and reform of legal education.


Keywords


legislative inertia; biocomputing; regulatory gap; new technologies; biosafety law

Full Text:

PDF

References


Literature

Adleman L.M., Molecular Computation of Solutions to Combinatorial Problems, “Science” 1994, vol. 266(5187), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7973651.

Baylis F., Altered Inheritance: CRISPR and the Ethics of Human Genome Editing, Cambridge 2019.

Benenson Y., Biomolecular Computing Systems: Principles, Progress and Potential, “Nature Reviews Genetics” 2012, vol. 13(7), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3197.

Brownsword R., Law, Technology and Society: Re-Imagining the Regulatory Environment, London–New York 2019.

Collingridge D., The Social Control of Technology, London 1980.

Dworkin R., Imperium prawa, Warszawa 2022.

Dworkin R., Law’s Empire, Cambridge 1986.

Głażewski M., Teoria systemów autopojetycznych Niklasa Luhmanna – między metafizyką a metabiologią, “Przegląd Pedagogiczny” 2009, no. 1.

Hart H.L.A., Pojęcie prawa, Warszawa 1998.

Hart H.L.A., The Concept of Law, Oxford 1961.

Heller M.A., Eisenberg R.S., Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research, “Science” 1998, vol. 280(5364), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.280.5364.698.

Ienca M., Andorno R., Towards New Human Rights in the Age of Neuroscience and Neurotechnology, “Life Sciences, Society and Policy” 2017, vol. 13(1), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40504-017-0050-1.

Izdebski K., Kopińska G., Berek M., Frączak P., Wołejko P., Polski BezŁad Legislacyjny. Raport Obywatelskiego Forum Legislacji z prac IX kadencji Sejmu, Warszawa 2023.

Kaufmann A., Über die Stabilität des Rechts, “Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie” 1979, vol. 65.

Korycka-Zirk M., Reguły prawne jako istota pojęcia prawa w ujęciu H.L.A. Harta, “Studia Iuridica Toruniensia” 2010, vol. 6.

Kuzma J., Kokotovich A., Nanotechnology, Society, and Policy Issues, “Nanotechnology Law & Business” 2011, vol. 8(4).

Luhmann N., Das Recht der Gesellschaft, Frankfurt am Main 1993.

Marchant G.E., Governance of Emerging Technologies as a Wicked Problem, “Vanderbilt Law Review” 2020, vol. 73(6).

Marchant G.E., The Growing Gap Between Emerging Technologies and the Law, [in:] The Growing Gap Between Emerging Technologies and Legal-Ethical Oversight: The Pacing Problem, G. Marchant, B. Allenby, J. Herkert (eds.), Dordrecht 2011.

Marchant G.E., Abbott K.W., Allenby B. (eds.), Innovative Governance Models for Emerging Technologies, Cheltenham 2013.

Nonet P., Selznick P., Law and Society in Transition: Toward Responsive Law, New York 1978.

Legal acts

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine (Oviedo Convention), Oviedo, 4 April 1997, CETS no. 164.

Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions (OJ L 213/13, 30.07.1998).

Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC (OJ L 106/1, 17.04.2001).

Act of 22 June 2001 on microorganisms and genetically modified organisms (consolidated text, Journal of Laws 2022, item 546, as amended).

Act of 6 September 2001 – Pharmaceutical Law (consolidated text, Journal of Laws 2022, item 2301, as amended).

Regulation (EC) No. 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed (OJ L 268/1, 18.10.2003).

Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119/1, 4.05.2016).

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No. 300/2008, (EU) No. 167/2013, (EU) No. 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Artificial Intelligence Act) (OJ L, 2024/1689, 12.07.2024).




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/glosa.2026.3.81-95
Date of publication: 2026-10-07 14:45:01
Date of submission: 2026-06-17 23:00:16


Statistics


Total abstract view - 0
Downloads (from 2020-06-17) - PDF - 0

Indicators



Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2026 Gloss. Commercial Law in Judgments and Commentaries

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