Author: Tinevimbo Chidhaya School Vishwakarma University
To the Point
The conflict between human rights and emerging technology (especially Artificial Intelligence (AI) is one of the greatest issues of the 21st century. And at the heart of this intersection is the question: Can technological progress exist alongside the preservation of basic human freedoms? AI systems are embedded in everyday life, in the apps we use and the institutions we trust to make decisions about everything from work to criminal sentencing. Unfortunately, these systems too often function as opaque black boxes that leave us in the dark with no way to fight back when things go wrong.
This increasing dependence on AI unfortunately raises the potential to undermine human rights as enshrined in Constitutions and International agreements, from privacy to freedom of speech to equality before the law. With AI’s insatiable appetite for personal data plus with a lack of stringent regulatory oversight, has created an ecosystem vulnerable to data breaches, state surveillance, algorithmic discrimination, and corporate exploitation.
In India, this debate has come to the fore following the landmark Puttaswamy judgment, which recognized privacy as a fundamental right. Despite this, India is still in the early stages of developing a strong, rights-based digital governance framework. As AI becomes a central force in both governance and commerce, the legal and ethical frameworks that guide its development must be reimagined to ensure that technological advancement does not come at the expense of human dignity.
Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as a double-edged sword—on one hand, it offers revolutionary potential for innovation, governance, and social welfare; on the other, it presents significant threats to civil liberties and human rights. As AI systems increasingly make autonomous decisions and process vast quantities of personal data, urgent questions arise about privacy, fairness, accountability, and transparency.
This article explores the intricate relationship between human rights and digital technology, particularly focusing on data privacy and AI ethics. It examines how current laws both in India and globally,struggle to keep pace with the rapid evolution of AI capabilities. By drawing upon foundational legal doctrines, landmark case law, and international human rights principles, the article aims to point out the areas which needs more improvement and proposes measures that are ethical and inclusive.
The objective is to foster a human-centric digital environment, where the design and deployment of AI technologies are guided not merely by profit or efficiency, but by constitutional values, democratic oversight, and the principles of justice and equity. Without such a framework, the unchecked spread of AI poses a serious risk of normalizing surveillance, reinforcing inequality, and undermining the foundational rights of citizens in a digital society.
Use of Legal Jargon
The deployment of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in governance and commercial applications challenges foundational legal doctrines embedded in constitutional and international human rights law. Key legal concepts such as informational autonomy, algorithmic accountability, and procedural fairness are increasingly invoked in debates around AI ethics.Privacy right was explained in the case of Puttaswamy vs Union of India . In terms of constitutional law, AI can violate Article 14 (equality before the law), Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of expression) and Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Indian Constitution.
In international human rights law, the protection of privacy, liberty and dignity in all forms, online and off, is stressed by instruments such as the UDHR and the Human Rights Committee’s General Comment No. 16.The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of the European Union introduces key legal standards such as data minimization, purpose limitation, and explicit consent. It also mandates data subject rights like the right to be forgotten and the right to explanation,in cases involving automated decision-making. These legal frameworks highlight the growing recognition of algorithmic governance as a domain requiring legal regulation through rights-based mechanisms.
Moreover, the principle of proportionality,a constitutional doctrine used to assess the legitimacy of state actions interfering with fundamental rights,is crucial in evaluating the use of AI in surveillance and profiling. Without proper checks and balances, AI tools can violate legal norms, leading to chilling effects, due process violations, and digital discrimination.
The Proof
The increasing incorporation of AI into public and private decision-making has already produced measurable human rights violations. For instance, predictive policing algorithms used in various jurisdictions have disproportionately targeted minority communities, reinforcing historical biases embedded in the data sets. Studies by MIT and Stanford (2018) revealed that facial recognition systems misidentified women and people of color at significantly higher rates than white males—raising concerns about equal protection and disparate impact, which are critical components of constitutional equality jurisprudence.
In India, the proposed National Automated Facial Recognition System (AFRS) has sparked concern due to the lack of a data protection regime and independent oversight. The use of such systems without legislative safeguards can be construed as a violation of the principles of legality and necessity, key tests laid down in Puttaswamy for restricting privacy rights.
Furthermore, AI systems employed in credit scoring and job recruitment have shown tendencies to replicate structural inequalities, denying individuals economic opportunities without giving them the ability to contest decisions,a violation of natural justice and procedural due process.
The absence of transparency and explainability in AI models, commonly referred to as the “black box problem,” compounds the issue. It impairs the ability of individuals to seek remedies, violating Article 8 of the UDHR (right to an effective remedy). Data collected through opaque methods and processed for secondary purposes without consent also breaches the principle of purpose limitation under GDPR and undermines informational self-determination, a core tenet of data privacy.
Case Laws
- Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)
This landmark judgement by the Supreme Court of India recognized the right to privacy as fundamental right under article 21 of the Constitution.The Court held that privacy is essential for the exercise of other rights , including the right to free speech and expression. This case laid the groundwork for discussions on data privacy, especially in the context of government surveillance and the use of personal data.
2. Carpenter v. United States (2018) – U.S. Supreme Court
The Court ruled that law enforcement requires a warrant to access historical cell phone location records, underscoring the importance of digital privacy protections in the era of mass data collection.
3. Facebook, Inc. v. Schrems (Schrems II, 2020)
The Court of the Justice of the European Union denounced the privacy shield that was between EU and US over concerns that U.S. surveillance laws did not meet EU standards of data protection, demonstrating the global importance of data privacy safeguards.
Conclusion
As Artificial Intelligence becomes an integral part of our digital ecosystem, its unchecked growth presents a real danger to the legal and moral foundations of democratic societies. The convergence of technology and governance demands a human rights-first approach,one that does not treat privacy, equality, or dignity as negotiable in the face of innovation.
Existing legal regimes, especially in the Indian context, are lagging far behind the ethical and constitutional asks requested by AI. Although Puttaswamy was a watershed moment in judicial recognition of the right to privacy, it is still not known how well citizens will be shielded from practices of surveillance capitalism and state overreach or be subject to a digital divide which can challenge digital exclusion in an economy driven by algorithms.
Moving forward, there is an urgent need for legislative clarity, ethical AI design principles, and a constitutional commitment to transparency, fairness, and accountability. This includes mandating impact assessments, ensuring data localization safeguards, and empowering individuals with rights to explanation, consent, and redress.
In the absence of such reforms, the promise of AI risks becoming a vehicle for new forms of discrimination, rather than a tool for progress. The future of technology must be human-centered, and the rule of law must serve as its guiding compass.
FAQs
1. What are the human rights concerns in respect to AI?
AI systems can violate privacy, promote discrimination, undermine autonomy, and make unaccountable decisions thus raising issues under rights to equality, privacy, and due process.
2. What is the legal status of data privacy in India?
Data privacy is recognized as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 is the primary legislation, although critics argue it lacks robust enforcement mechanisms.
3. How does AI create ethical dilemmas?
AI can make decisions without transparency, leading to bias, inequality, and loss of human oversight. This raises ethical questions about fairness, accountability, and the delegation of moral choices to machines.
4. What are algorithmic biases?
Algorithmic bias occurs when AI systems reflect or amplify human prejudices due to biased data sets or flawed programming, leading to discriminatory outcomes in hiring, policing, lending, etc.
5. What reforms are needed?
India and other countries requires proper governance when it comes to AI that constitute:
- Ethical guidelines
- Algorithmic audits
- Data protection enforcement
- Public participation
- Judicial oversight
These ensure that innovation respects human dignity and fundamental rights.
