ECNL welcomes the unanimous adoption of key resolutions at the 51st session of the UN Human Rights Council (12 September – 7 October 2022) acknowledging the need to further examine the impact of new and emerging technologies on human rights, including civic freedoms, with the meaningful participation of civil society in this assessment. This is particularly relevant as many public decision-making processes affecting people’s rights are run, or significantly assisted by, automated algorithm-driven systems, including machine-learning (“artificial intelligence”) systems.
We reviewed the language of three resolutions (namely, on human rights implications of new and emerging technologies in the military domain; on neurotechnology and human rights; and on countering cyberbullying) and we are pleased to see that they:
- consistently call for these technologies to abide by international human rights law throughout their entire lifecycle (including conception) and to be subject to adequate safeguards and oversight;
- recognise the importance of an open and participatory process in developing new and emerging technologies, including digital tech.
1) Resolution A/HRC/51/L.25 on human rights implications of new and emerging technologies in the military domain
This Resolution – led by Austria and Panama – recognises that “the use of new and emerging technologies in the military domain, especially certain forms of automated decision-making, may, in certain circumstances, cause, contribute to or facilitate the commission of human rights violations and abuses”. It also notes that when such technologies rely on nonrepresentative data sets, algorithm-based programming and machine-learning processes, “their use can reproduce and exacerbate existing patterns of structural discrimination, marginalization, social inequalities, stereotypes and bias and create unpredictability of outcomes.”
Therefore, the Resolution recognises the need to ensure that “the conception, design, development, deployment, evaluation and regulation of data-driven technologies” respect international human rights law and are subject to adequate safeguards and oversight. In particular, it welcomes the role of human rights defenders and civil society organisations in raising awareness about the human rights impacts of the use of new and emerging technologies in the military domain.
Finally, the Resolution mandates the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee to prepare a study examining the human rights implications of new and emerging technologies in the military domain, and in doing so, to seek the views and inputs from a broad range of stakeholders, including civil society. The study’s findings will be presented to the 60th Session of the UN Human Rights Council (September-October 2025).
2) Resolution A/HRC/51/L.3 on neurotechnology and human rights
Simply put, neurotechnology is a branch of neuroscience (i.e., the study of the nervous system) that researches and develops special devices directly connected with the nervous system, to monitor or interfere/influence its activity. These devices range from electrodes, computers, to micro-chips, smart prostheses, etc. Examples of neurotechnology applications include brain-computer interfaces, brain scans (EEG, fMRI) and brain-controlled prostheses.
This Resolution - led by Greece, Chile and Singapore - acknowledges that the connecting of the human brain directly to digital networks through special devices and procedures “may be used, among other things, to access, monitor and manipulate the neural system of the person”, violating their right to mental privacy and altering their freedom of thought. Examples from the current practice include invasive devices surgically implanted to sense and record information by measuring electrical activity from the brain and improve people’s functionality (e.g., in patients with mobile disabilities or to treat depression). Brain scans have also already been used by the judiciary to infer active participation in a murder. It is not far-fetched to assume that without proper safeguards, similar devices might be misused to restrict our civic freedoms , e.g., to adopt pre-emptive restrictive measures against potential suspects singled out by the analysis of their brain activity, disproportionate surveillance or even “social scoring” of individuals.
That said, the Resolution is mindful that “the impact, opportunities and challenges of neurotechnology with regard to the promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights are not fully understood” yet. Therefore, it mandates the Advisory Committee of the Human Rights Council to “prepare a study in an accessible format, including easy-to read version, on the impact, opportunities and challenges of neurotechnology with regard to the promotion and protection of all human rights". In conducting this study, the Committee should also seek the views and inputs from a broad range of stakeholders, including civil society. The study’s findings will be presented to the 57th Session of the Human Rights Council (September-October 2023).
3) Resolution A/HRC/51/L.17 on countering cyberbullying
This Resolution – led by Israel – mostly focuses on protection of children and points to the need ensure their “effective and meaningful participation”, including their contributions, views and recommendations in the efforts to prevent cyberbullying.
Furthermore, the Resolution acknowledges that “relevant regulatory frameworks and legislation, and safeguards on the conception, design, use, development, further deployment and impact assessments of new and emerging digital technologies” should ensure “appropriate safeguards and human oversight” as well as “meaningful participation of all stakeholders”, including civil society, “with the best interests of the child as a primary consideration.
What’s next for civil society’s participation
Overall, these three resolutions uphold the need to ensure meaningful multi-stakeholder participation – including of civil society:
- in the preparation of studies assessing the impact of new and emerging technologies on human rights – with additional explicit references to their impact on freedom of thought, opinion, expression, peaceful assembly and association;
- in the drafting of relevant frameworks, legislation and safeguards on conception, design, use, development, further deployment and impact assessments of new and emerging digital technologies.
It is crucial that these processes are conducted with a meaningful involvement of a broader civil society community, including human rights defenders, marginalised and vulnerable groups in particular, in order to effectively address the challenges they face.
ECNL will follow on these processes closely and keep bridging the divide between diverse stakeholders, facilitating meaningful feedback from such groups.