Print
See related documents
Recommendation 2102 (2017)
Technological convergence, artificial intelligence and human rights
1. The convergence between nanotechnology,
biotechnology, information technology and cognitive sciences and
the speed at which the applications of new technologies are put
on the market have consequences not only for human rights and the
way they can be exercised, but also for the fundamental concept
of what characterises a human being.
2. The pervasiveness of new technologies and their applications
is blurring the boundaries between human and machine, between online
and offline activities, between the physical and the virtual world,
between the natural and the artificial, and between reality and
virtuality. Humankind is increasing its abilities by boosting them
with the help of machines, robots and software. Today it is possible
to create functional brain–computer interfaces. A shift has been
made from the “treated” human being to the “repaired” human being,
and what is now looming on the horizon is the “augmented” human
being.
3. The Parliamentary Assembly notes with concern that it is increasingly
difficult for lawmakers to adapt to the speed at which science and
technologies evolve and to draw up the required regulations and
standards; it strongly believes that safeguarding human dignity
in the 21st century implies developing new forms of governance,
new forms of open, informed and adversarial public debate, new legislative
mechanisms and above all the establishment of international co-operation
making it possible to address these new challenges most effectively.
4. The Assembly recalls the principle enshrined in Article 2
of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity
of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and
Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (ETS No. 164,
“Oviedo Convention”) which affirms the primacy of the human being
by stating that “[t]he interests and welfare of the human being
shall prevail over the sole interest of society or science”.
5. In this regard, the Assembly welcomes the initiative of the
Council of Europe Committee on Bioethics to organise, in October
2017 on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the Council of Europe
Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, an international conference
to discuss the prospect of the emergence of these new technologies
and their consequences for human rights, with a view to drawing
up a strategic action plan during the next biennium 2018-19.
6. In addition, the Assembly considers that it is necessary to
implement genuine world internet governance that is not dependent
on private interest groups or just a handful of States.
7. The Assembly calls on the Committee of Ministers to:
7.1. finalise without further delay
the modernisation of the Convention for the Protection of Individuals with
regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data (ETS No. 108) in
order to have new provisions making it possible to put rapidly in
place more appropriate protection;
7.2. define the framework for the use of care robots and assistive
technologies in the Council of Europe Disability Strategy 2017-2023
in the framework of its objective to achieve equality, dignity and equal
opportunities for people with disabilities.
8. In the light of the above, the Assembly urges the Committee
of Ministers to instruct the relevant bodies of the Council of Europe
to consider how intelligent artefacts and/or connected devices and,
more generally, technological convergence and its social and ethical
consequences related to the field of genetics and genomics, neurosciences
and big data, challenge the different dimensions of human rights.
9. Moreover, the Assembly proposes that guidelines be drawn up
on the following issues:
9.1. strengthening
transparency, regulation by public authorities and operators’ accountability concerning:
9.1.1. the fact that responsibility and accountability of an
act lie with the human being, no matter what the circumstances may
be. References to independent decision making by artificial intelligence
systems cannot exempt the creators, owners and managers of these
systems from accountability for human rights violations committed
with the use of these systems, even in cases where an act causing
damage was not directly ordered by a responsible human commander
or operator;
9.1.2. automatic processing operations aimed at collecting, handling
and using personal data;
9.1.3. informing the public about the value of the data they
generate, consent to the use of those data and the length of time
they are to be stored;
9.1.4. informing people about the processing of personal data
originating from them and about the mathematical and statistical
methods making profiling possible;
9.1.5. the design and use of persuasion software and of information
and communication technology (ICT) or artificial intelligence algorithms,
that must fully respect the dignity and human rights of all users,
especially the most vulnerable, such as elderly people and people
with disabilities;
9.2. a common framework of standards to be complied with when
a court uses artificial intelligence;
9.3. the need for any machine, any robot or any artificial
intelligence artefact to remain under human control; insofar as
the machine in question is intelligent solely through its software,
any power it is given must be able to be withdrawn from it;
9.4. the recognition of new rights in terms of respect for
private and family life, the ability to refuse to be subjected to
profiling, to have one’s location tracked, to be manipulated or
influenced by a “coach” and the right to have the opportunity, in
the context of care and assistance provided to elderly people and
people with disabilities, to choose to have contact with a human
being rather than a robot.
10. The Assembly reiterates its call made in Resolution 2051 (2015) “Drones and
targeted killings: the need to uphold human rights and international
law” to all member States and observer States, as well as States whose
parliaments have observer status with the Assembly, to refrain from
any automated (robotic) procedures for selecting individuals for
targeted killings or any sort of injury based on communication patterns
or other data collected through mass surveillance techniques. This
should be true not only for drones but also for other combat equipment
with artificial intelligence systems, as well as other equipment
and/or software which might potentially inflict damage on people,
property, personal data or information databases, or interfere with
privacy, freedom of expression, or the right to equality and non-discrimination.
11. The Assembly calls for close co-operation with the institutions
of the European Union and the United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) to ensure a consistent legal
framework and effective supervisory mechanisms at international
level.