This section provides an overview of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the European Social Charter (ESC), and the Framework Convention, outlining the general principles of the ECHR and the ESC that may govern the protection of rights in the context of AI. It also highlights relevant principles from the Framework Convention where they offer valuable guidance within ECHR and the ESC framework. Additionally, it examines recurring human rights challenges that may arise in relation to the use of AI systems.

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is the core human rights instrument of the Council of Europe. It sets binding standards for public authorities in member States. The European Court of Human Rights ensures the observance of the ECHR by the States. Individuals, groups, legal persons, and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) can bring complaints of alleged human rights violations before the Court once all domestic remedies have been exhausted.

The European Social Charter (ESC)

As the core instrument for economic and social rights within the Council of Europe, the European Social Charter (ESC) guarantees fundamental protections that complement the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Revised European Social Charter (RESC) incorporates new rights and amendments. 42 out of the 46 member States of the Council of Europe are parties to either the ESC or the RESC Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino and Switzerland are not parties to either of these treaties.. The ESC is monitored by the European Committee of Social Rights (ECSR) through two mechanisms: (i) regular reporting by States parties on their implementation of the ESC, and (ii) collective complaints lodged by the social partners and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), for those States having ratified the 1995 Additional Protocol Providing for a System of Collective Complaints 16 of the 42 Parties to the ESC have ratified this Additional Protocol.. Insofar as they refer to binding legal provisions and are adopted by a monitoring body established by the ESC, the conclusions and decisions of the ECSR represent an authoritative, although not legally binding interpretation of the ESC’s provisions. States Parties have an obligation to cooperate with the ESCR and to take into account its decisions and conclusions, that arises from the application of the principle of good faith to the observance of their treaty obligations under the ESC.

Core human rights issues across public governance sectors

The use of AI systems can impact a range of human rights, with certain issues consistently emerging across contexts. These include risks for (i) non-discrimination and equality; (ii) personal data protection and privacy; and (iii) the ability to effectively challenge AI-based decisions and effective remedies. Competing human rights obligations in the context of AI may also be an issue across sectors. These recurring challenges are cross-cutting human rights concerns in the lifecycle of AI systems and are therefore not limited to one or more public sectors.

The Framework Convention on AI and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law

The Framework Convention reinforces existing international standards (such as the ECHR and the ESC) as may be applicable to each Party In the EU, the Framework Convention is to be implemented exclusively through the Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and the Council (AI Act), and other relevant Union acquis, where applicable.. It adopts a technology-neutral approach, focusing on principles rather than regulating specific technologies. It applies to activities within the lifecycle of AI systems undertaken by public authorities (including private actors acting on their behalf) Framework Convention, Article 3 subparagraph 1 (a).. With regard to activities by private actors acting independently, State Parties undertake to address risks and impacts in a manner conforming with the object and purpose of the Framework Convention, either by applying directly the principles and obligations set forth in the Convention or by taking “other appropriate measures” Article 3 subparagraph 1 (b).. In addition, matters relating to national defence are exempted from the scope of the treaty Article 3 paragraph 4. Also note that under Article 1.d. of its Statute, “Matters relating to national defence do not fall within the scope of the Council of Europe”., as well as (i) activities related to the protection of the State Parties’ “national security interests” with the understanding that such activities are conducted in a manner consistent with applicable international law, including international human rights law obligations, and with respect for each Party’s democratic institutions and processes; Article 3 paragraph 2. and (ii) research and development activities, unless testing or similar activities are undertaken in such a way that they have the potential to interfere with human rights, democracy and the rule of law Article 3 paragraph 3.. 

ECHR and ESC General Principles in the Context of AI

There is as yet only limited guidance from the Court and ECSR on the impact of AI technologies on rights under the ECHR and ESC While the Court has yet to directly address AI, it has examined cases involving new technologies and their impact on human rights, including technologies integrating AI features, such as facial recognition systems (see Glukhin v. Russia, Application No. 11519/20, 4 July 2023; see also Factsheet – New technologies).. However, established principles from the ECHR and the ESC can inform how these treaties may apply to AI-related human rights challenges. While some principles are common to both, others are specific to one or the other treaty The ECHR and ESC treaty systems are complementary and interdependent. The Court has clarified that there is no watertight division separating civil and political rights from economic, social and cultural rights. See Airey v Ireland, No. 6289/73, 9 October 1979, § 24; see also Digest of Case Law of the European Committee of Social Rights, December 2022, p. 33..