Handbook on Human Rights and Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being adopted across society, unlocking new opportunities for innovation and progress. This includes the potential to advance human rights by, for example, expediting judicial proceedings, enhancing healthcare through predictive diagnostics, and personalising education to meet individual learning needs. Yet alongside these opportunities come risks to human rights.

The potential threat to human rights from the development and use of AI systems has been acknowledged by the international community and has driven global efforts to regulate this set of technologies. See for example, the Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and the Council ("AI Act”) of the European Union; the OECD “Recommendation on Artificial Intelligence” adopted in 2019, revised in 2023 and 2024; UNESCO's "Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence", adopted in 2021. The United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/78/265 “Seizing the opportunities of safe, secure and trustworthy artificial intelligence systems for sustainable development” (21 March 2024); and Resolution A/RES/78/311 on “Enhancing International Cooperation on Capacity-building of Artificial Intelligence” (1 July 2024).The Council of Europe began working on the theme of AI a decade ago and has intensified its efforts in recent years, with several Council of Europe bodies and committees issuing a number of policy documentsFor an overview of the work done so far, or planned, by the intergovernmental committees and other entities of the Council of Europe in the area of AI, see Council of Europe and Artificial Intelligence, recommendations, declarations, guidelines and other legal instruments. The Council of Europe’s Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law (“the Framework Convention”) is the first international treaty on AI and human rights.Status of signatures and ratifications. It establishes principles and obligations to ensure that AI systems are fully consistent with human rights,Article 1 – Object and purpose, § 1. democracy, and the rule of law throughout their lifecycle while being conducive to technological progress and innovation.

Existing Council of Europe human rights instruments, such as the European Convention on Human Rights and its Protocols (ECHR) and the European Social Charter (ESC), remain applicable in the context of AI: member States must align their frameworks on AI with their obligations under the ECHR and ESC. These instruments, interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) and the European Committee on Social Rights (ECSR) respectively, establish basic standards for the protection of human rights,See section 3.1.3. below. including in areas that are not covered by the Framework Convention as well as for those member States that are not States parties to the Framework Convention.

This Handbook on Human Rights and Artificial Intelligence (‘Handbook’) has been designed as an accessible tool primarily to support government officials and policymakers in Council of Europe member States in applying ECHR, ESC and other human rights standards to the use of AI. Given the diverse audience of policymakers and government officials working across various areas of public governance, this Handbook does not assume extensive prior knowledge of human rights law or AI-related issues. Nor does it aim to provide an exhaustive analysis of every topic addressed.

As a practical resource, it provides insights into how these standards, along with instruments like the Framework Convention, may apply to activities in AI systems’ lifecycle.Focusing on key AI use cases in public governance, both current and reasonably foreseeable, it offers a framework to assess AI's human rights impacts considering ECHR and ESC standards, without predicting specific outcomes of future cases.Those will be based on their specific factual circumstances, in the light of the relevant domestic legislation and practice of the member State concerned, and within the scope of the relevant European standards that will exist at the time when the case is examined, see Zavodnik v. Slovenia, No. 53723/13, 21 May 2015, § 74.