United Nations Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism

Ensuring that AI systems are effectively regulated in the context of counter-terrorism, national security, law enforcement, border management, intelligence and security, and military applications, in order to comply with international human rights law, international humanitarian law, and international refugee law. My office as Special Rapporteur recently published a Position Paper on Protecting Human Rights while Using Artificial Intelligence to Counter Terrorism, with 31 detailed recommendations: https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/position-papers/protecting-human-rights-while-using-artificial-intelligence-counter A one page summary is available here: https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/terrorism/sr/statements/sr-ct-ai-summary.pdf The diverse uses of AI in counter-terrorism contexts have the potential to violate numerous fundamental rights, including privacy and data protection; equality and non-discrimination; freedoms of expression, association, peaceful assembly and religion; political participation; liberty; security of person; life; and the rights of vulnerable, marginalised and disadvantaged groups. The work and safety of human rights defenders is also at risk. Some of the Special Rapporteur's key recommendations include: 1. Dedicated, clear legal frameworks for the use of AI in security contexts o No blanket exceptions for policing, security, military, or border security o Avoid ineffective, laissez-faire industry self-regulation; o Specific regulation in military contexts; 2. Prohibitions on the use or transfer of AI systems that cannot meet human rights standards, or that pose an unacceptable risk; 3. Heightened, risk-based regulation of permissible AI systems; 4. Thorough human rights due diligence assessments by developers and deployers of AI throughout their lifecycle, with dissuasive sanctions; 5. Stringent safeguards on data quality, testing and validation; 6. Ensure AI systems are transparent and explainable; 7. Effective personal data protection and data security; 8. Rigorous transfer and export controls; 9. Meaningful human control and expertise in decision-making; 10.Effective, specialized oversight, accountability and remedies.

• Protection and promotion of human rights
• Transparency, accountability, and human oversight
• Social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic and technical implications of AI
• Safe, secure and trustworthy AI

See answer to questionCertain uses of AI systems by State authorities in countering terrorism can profoundly infringe human rights. AI algorithms can aggregate and analyse highly personal and sensitive data. Such information may be used to profile the alleged terrorist risks of individuals and groups and prompt invasive counter-terrorism measures, including surveillance, arrest and detention, administrative restrictions, kinetic operations, and other measures to prevent terrorism and violent extremism. Yet, AI systems are far from infallible. Their datasets and algorithms may be biased, too limited or unrepresentative, illegally sourced or inaccurate, potentially leading to discriminatory profiling, violations of the right to privacy, and counter-productive false positives. AI systems may lack adequate human control and analysis, resulting in over-reliance on automated decision-making lacking in nuance, context and responsiveness to human rights considerations. Many AI systems are still in developmental phases, and their capabilities, including in real-world conditions, remain to be proved. There is a real risk that proponents of AI, including corporate actors fuelling the current global AI investment boom, may overstate the benefits and minimise the costs. Since the number of actual terrorists in most populations is very small, serious dataset limitations can prevent meaningful extrapolation for the purpose of future threat detection. The proprietary and national security secrecy surrounding AI can shield the technology from independent scrutiny to validate its effectiveness and risks, including both false positive rates and failures to detect risks. There is limited data available about how widely AI systems are being used by counter-terrorism authorities globally, objectively how effective they are, what rights violations they are causing. In the experience of United Nations human rights mechanisms, the use of new technologies in counter-terrorism has unleashed new waves of human rights violations and there is good reason to expect the same from AI unless old habits change.

See previous answers and Position Paper cited earlier.

See Position Paper already mentioned

See Position Paper already mentioned

See Position Paper already mentioned. Ensure representation of diverse civil society actors.

See Position Paper already mentioned. Ensure representation of diverse civil society actors.

See Position Paper already mentioned. Ensure representation of diverse civil society actors.

See Position Paper already mentioned.