The secretary-general of the United Nations warned on Thursday for the first time that neurotechnologies are advancing so rapidly that governments’ ability to access and manipulate people’s brains could one day pose a threat to fundamental human rights. Secretary-General António Guterres said the abuse of future technologies could lead to arbitrary detentions, the alteration of people’s mental states and infringements on privacy. He wrote that neurotechnology, including new and emerging forms, raises profound human rights challenges when applied to the administration of justice.
Its expansion beyond clinical settings into investigative, judicial and correctional contexts introduces significant risks, alongside potential benefits. To address such threats, the U.N. report recommends establishing regulations consistent with international law, recognizing thoughts as “highly sensitive personal data” and requiring explicit consent for the use of neurotechnology in criminal justice settings. Human rights officials said the document was an important step toward raising global awareness of the issue and that it could help countries develop laws to prevent the abuse of such technology.
Jeremy Laurence, a spokesman for the U.N. Human Rights Office, said this gives states an opportunity to establish clear rules to regulate the use of neurotechnology, based on human rights, before they become routine in investigations, courts and prisons. Marcello Ienca, a professor of ethics and neuroscience at the Technical University of Munich, noted that the report broadens the traditional understanding of freedom of thought to include keeping one’s innermost ideas private. The U.N.’s interest comes amid a growing global push to protect brain data, with Chile enshrining protections in its constitution in 2012 and several U.S. states passing laws protecting neural data.
However, in India, police have used the Brain Electrical Oscillation Signature (BEOS) technology for two decades to assess suspect involvement in crimes, despite its scientific basis being scant and results being inadmissible in court. BEOS has not been validated by the international scientific community, and a government committee concluded in 2008 that it was “sub-optimal.” While many neurotechnologies are marketed as consumer wellness gadgets, experts warn they are subject to few regulations, with most companies lacking limits on how they use brain data and allowing sharing with third parties. Neurotechnologies also serve as powerful clinical tools, helping paralyzed patients communicate via brain-computer interfaces.
Source: New York Times Top Stories · Summarized by HeadlinesBriefing