Can your brain data be used against you? The UN calls for limits on neurotechnology

Presenting the Secretary-General’s report to the General Assembly on Thursday, senior human rights official Claudia Fuentes Julio said the technology could threaten privacy, freedom of thought and the right to a fair trial, especially for marginalized people..

Key points

• The new one report examines the increasing use of neurotechnology in the justice system and the risks arising from its convergence with artificial intelligence (AI)
• Data collected via gaming or health devices, for example, could be used in court, impacting human rights, including the right to a fair trial.
• The report calls for banning coercive and abusive applications of neurotechnology and establishing stronger legal and ethical safeguards

When high technology meets the law

Neurotechnology was once exclusively used for medical diagnosis or treatment, measurement, monitoring, analysis, prediction or modulation of the nervous system.

This new technology collects neural data – defined as qualitative and quantitative data about the structure, activity and function of the nervous system.

“Neurotechnology accesses, measures and analyzes brain signals,” wrote the UN Secretary General in his report. “If these signals are treated as direct indicators of thought, intention, or truth, the use of neural data points can undermine the way we understand and value each of us as humans..”

Once confined to clinical or research environments, these devices are now entering, or may enter, consumer markets, workplaces, schools, public services, law enforcement and justice systems, the report found.

Play games for health

UN Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights Claudia Fuentes Julio highlighted various risks when introducing the report to members of the Third Committee, including the increasing commercialization of neurotechnology and the collection of large amounts of neural data by technology companies.

Marketed for health, gaming and productivity, wearable devices called electroencephalographs are becoming more widely available.

Thus, neural data is collected via these devices can be accessed by governments or used as evidence in legal proceedings without adequate acknowledgment of their sensitive naturethe report warns.

From privacy to fair trial rights

While these new technologies hold great promise, especially for medical applications and assistive devices, Ms Fuentes Julio said the report “warns of risks to dignity, privacy, freedom of thought, fair trial rights, freedom and protection from ill-treatment, especially for marginalized groups”.

It is true that, when applied in the courtroom, these technologies serve different purposes and pose different legal and human rights risks, especially as tools and data developed for medical use are reused without proper safeguards, the report argues.

Ms. Julio Fuentes said the report called for “prohibition of coercive and abusive use, and stronger safeguards, informed consent, scientific validation, oversight, accountability, and neurodata protection.”

The report emphasizes that the neural data, as “unique sensitive personal data,” demands greater protection.

Read the full report Here.