Back to General issues

 

  Activities within the lifecycle of AI systems must comply with the following principles:[1]

  • Human dignity and individual autonomy
  • Transparency and oversight
  • Accountability and responsibility
  • Equality and non-discrimination
  • Respect for privacy and personal data protection
  • Reliability
  • Safe innovation

Key requirements include the availability of remedies, to the extent any remedies are required by a Party’s international obligations for AI-related violations of human rights,[2] ensuring procedural safeguards for affected persons, including seeking to ensure as appropriate for the context the provision of notice to persons interacting with AI systems;[3] conducting risk and impact assessments[4] on human rights, democracy, and the rule of law; and enabling the possibility of bans, moratoria or other appropriate measures in respect of certain uses of AI systems that the State Party considers incompatible with respect for human rights, the functioning of democracy or the rule of law.[5] The Framework Convention also provides for follow-up mechanisms and cooperation and introduces an obligatory monitoring mechanism.[6

In view of technical complexity of the subject matter, the Council of Europe’s HUDERIA (Risk and impact assessment of AI systems from the point of view of human rights, democracy and the rule of law)[7]  provides supplementary non-legally binding guidance on how to operationalise and implement the Framework Convention’s obligations regarding the assessment of risks and impacts of AI systems.[8] It sits at the intersection of international human rights standards and existing technical frameworks on risk management in the AI context promoting the development of safe, secure and trustworthy AI that is both performant and promotes respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law. This Handbook may provide useful supplementary information to those applying HUDERIA.

 

[3] Article 15. Where an artificial intelligence system substantially informs or takes decisions impacting on human rights, effective procedural guarantees should, for instance, include human oversight, including ex ante or ex post review of the decision by humans (Explanatory Report, § 103).

[7] The HUDERIA is a stand-alone, non-legally binding guidance that does not have legal effect. It is not mandatory, nor intended as an interpretive aid for the Framework Convention. In addition, whilst the HUDERIA has a facilitative role, it is not a means to implement the Framework Convention. Many existing or future frameworks, policies, guidance, standards or tools may be used to assist in conducting AI risk and impact management, including the HUDERIA. Parties to the Framework Convention have the flexibility to use or adapt the guidance, in whole or in part, to develop new approaches to risk assessment or to use or adapt existing approaches in keeping with their applicable laws, provided that Parties fully meet their obligations under the Framework Convention, including the baseline for risk and impact management set out in its Chapter V. The HUDERIA complements, without being legally binding, the Framework Convention. It is to be supplemented by the HUDERIA Model – supporting materials such as tools and scalable recommendations to serve as a resource for risk management activities.

Back to General issues