Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
AI-based proctoring has become a contested instrument for safeguarding examination integrity in higher education, yet it processes extensive personal data, including video, audio and potentially biometric data. No publicly documented deployment of AI-based proctoring in Albanian universities was identified, although digitalisation and European Union accession make future adoption plausible. This article therefore asks whether the Albanian data protection framework is ready for that prospect. It applies doctrinal analysis to the Albanian-language text of Law No. 124/2024 “On Personal Data Protection”, the Constitution and the higher education legislation, benchmarks them against the General Data Protection Regulation and the EU Artificial Intelligence Act, and draws on decisions from Italy, the Netherlands and the United States as evidence of foreseeable legal risks. Hypothetical deployments are assessed in terms of legal risk, with attention to legal basis, the validity of student consent, special-category data, automated decision-making, impact assessment and proportionality. The analysis finds that Law 124/2024 would make the most intrusive designs, such as automated facial matching, home scans and solely automated sanctions, difficult to justify. It also finds that the legal basis for monitoring in public universities remains uncertain, that no dedicated AI legislation is in force, and that supervisory practice is untested. The article concludes with conditions under which less intrusive designs could potentially comply.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ina Shënplaku (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: