Hospital Regional de Cotia - SECONCI-SP-OSS
Responses
In your opinion, what outcomes would make the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance a success?
Responsible AI policies for government and corporate use.
From your perspective, which of the following thematic areas identified by the General Assembly Resolution 79/325 for the AI Dialogue reflect your priorities for urgent action and active engagement?
- Safe, secure and trustworthy AI
- Social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic and technical implications of AI
- Protection and promotion of human rights
- Transparency, accountability, and human oversight
Please briefly explain your selection.
The use of AI must be safe, ensuring people's integrity and protection while understanding individuals' cultural characteristics and promoting accountability and transparency. This creates a symbiosis between human development through AI and security for humanity.
In your opinion, are there any cross-cutting or emerging issues not captured by the listed themes above? If so, please explain.
1
The primary concern is the improper use of AI and the resulting personal and institutional liabilities.
How are the governance gaps and related developments/advances in the thematic areas you selected above affecting your country, region, or sector? Please highlight the most significant challenges.
The primary governance gaps in the healthcare sector center on the misuse of sensitive data and the lack of a clear legal framework for accountability. Without robust protection policies, AI integration into electronic health records poses a severe risk of data breaches that expose patient intimacy. Furthermore, the absence of defined liability—whether for the physician, the software developer, or the institution—creates significant legal uncertainty when AI-driven treatments result in errors. These gaps, combined with the rising threat of AI-powered cyberattacks such as ransomware and phishing, can paralyze emergency systems, directly transforming digital vulnerabilities into threats against human life and institutional stability.
What role can the AI Dialogue play in advancing international cooperation on AI governance?
I have no opinion on this matter.
What are some of the existing initiatives, partnerships, or mechanisms that the AI Dialogue should build upon or connect with, and what added value could the AI Dialogue bring?
I don't know specific international partnerships focused on the practical accountability of AI in the healthcare sector. Therefore, the added value of the AI Dialogue would be to pioneer the creation of a dedicated framework that bridges the gap between technological advancement and patient safety.
How can different stakeholders contribute to the AI Dialogue? Please share recommendations for the format and structure of the AI Dialogue.
Stakeholders contribute by aligning their unique experiences with collective expectations. The Dialogue should be structured through specialized working groups and practical workshops that prioritize accountability and institutional security, ensuring that AI advancement never compromises human integrity.
Which voices, communities, or perspectives are currently underrepresented in global discussions on AI governance? How could they be included?
Minority groups and communities with limited technological access are consistently underrepresented in global AI discussions. This exclusion creates a cycle where those most likely to be affected by algorithmic bias or automation have the least say in the rules governing these technologies.
What innovative engagement formats could most effectively foster meaningful and dynamic engagement during the AI Dialogue?
I have no opinion on this matter.
Please share examples of policies, practices, platforms, or approaches that promote effective AI governance or offer concrete solutions to addressing its challenges.
I have no opinion on this matter.