International Human Rights Law as a Framework for Algorithmic Accountability

Abstract

Existing approaches to ‘algorithmic accountability’, such as transparency, provide an important baseline, but are insufficient to address the (potential) harm to human rights caused by the use of algorithms in decision-making. In order to effectively address the impact on human rights, we argue that a framework that sets out a shared understanding and means of assessing harm; is capable of dealing with multiple actors and different forms of responsibility; and applies across the full algorithmic life cycle, from conception to deployment, is needed. While generally overlooked in debates on algorithmic accountability, in this article, we suggest that international human rights law already provides this framework. We apply this framework to illustrate the effect it has on the choices to employ algorithms in decision-making in the first place and the safeguards required. While our analysis indicates that in some circumstances, the use of algorithms may be restricted, we argue that these findings are not ‘anti-innovation’ but rather appropriate checks and balances to ensure that algorithms contribute to society, while safeguarding against risks.

Rethinking digital identity for post-COVID-19 societies: Data privacy and human rights considerations

“…State responsibility is engaged when harmful conduct is attributable to a State and when it constitutes a breach of one of the State's obligations under international law (International Law Commission, 2001;Marks and Azizi, 2010;McGregor et al 2019). Therefore, public authorities that deploy digital identity systems are responsible for the harms caused to individuals if their conduct breaches the applicable legal obligations to respect and protect human rights.…”

From human resources to human rights: Impact assessments for hiring algorithms

“…With a shared understanding provided by national legislation, companies will have a "common, comparable threshold" that they can use to benchmark themselves against in their sector for purposes of corporate accountability for human rights (Nahmias & Perel, 2020, p. 42). McGregor, et. al.…”

The global governance on automated facial recognition (AFR): ethical and legal opportunities and privacy challenges

“…Given the novelty of the technology as well as the lack of safeguard measures, global regulations must be created to avoid the violation of privacy in the digital age [130]. There is considerable need for a normative framework for AFR to help determine whether or not a specific deployment of AFR is human rights compliant [131]. The algorithms of the law must keep pace with new and emerging technologies.…”