Anna Su Discusses International Human Rights Law, AI

Angela Gu

On Wednesday February 12, Professor Anna Su gave a talk at U of T’s Center for Ethics as part of its Ethics@Noon series. The talk addressed her upcoming paper about the benefits and drawbacks of applying international human rights law to artificial intelligence (AI) governance.

Professor Su’s research primarily concerns human rights and religion, but she was drawn to AI because of the excitement surrounding AI regulation on Twitter. In her paper, Professor Su reviewed and compared the ethical statements regarding AI from governments and organizations around the world. Some organizations call for regulations beyond domestic law and argue that the application of international human rights law is needed. 

In her talk, Professor Su outlined three benefits and three drawbacks regarding the application of international human rights law to regulating AI. 

Benefits

  1. Human rights law provides a definition for many of the terms used in national and regional statements about AI. These include terms like “privacy,” “fairness,” and “equality”, which carry different meanings depending on the context in which they are used. The human rights law definitions include voices and perspectives that may not be consulted in the ethics statements. 
  2. Human rights law addresses geopolitical inequalities and allows voices from the Global South to be heard. In a world of AI nationalism where the race for developing AI technology could end up akin to an arms race between the United States, China, and the European Union, the Global South may unwittingly become the laboratory for technological experiments. 
  3. Human rights law provides a ready-made framework for public-private accountability. Much of the AI development in Canada and the U.S. has been in the private sector, and a lot of it is still voluntary in nature. There are efforts underway to make legally binding treaties to hold companies accountable for human rights violations.  

Drawbacks 

  1. Human rights law is often criticized for its lack of effectiveness because it relies on “naming and shaming” for accountability. But it can also galvanize public opinion. Civil society organizations can rely on human rights as a language of power and resistance to hold companies and governments accountable for their actions. 
  2. Human rights, as it is constructed now, focuses on the individual. This makes it difficult to attach rights at the societal and structural level. AI transforms society in various ways, such as impacting the labour market, the delivery of healthcare, and the delivery of financial services.
  3. Human rights law has an audit culture, with reporting and a fixation on indicators and compliance. Now, AI becomes part of the audit. Companies can satisfy themselves with pursuing metrics, which can be mobilized as a paper trail. 

It is an “exercise of comparison,” said Professor Su in her presentation. While there are limitations to human rights law, their frameworks are still better than voluntary, corporate statements that provide a narrow view of ethics. International human rights law can also be a good “gap-filler” if there is a lack of robust local AI regulations. 

Professor Su will be on sabbatical next year, and says that she is thinking of convening a panel on the topic of AI for good. “I think Toronto is a great place to organize these things because we’ve gotten that reputation of being an AI forerunner in this AI revolution” says Professor Su. However, Professor Su will be turning her academic focus back to religion, writing a historical book on how religion and the market came to be conceptualized as two separate things. 

Professor Su says that the ability to choose her research topics is “part of what makes this job amazing—apart from teaching you guys, of course.”

Categories:
Tags:

Advertisement

Begin typing your search above and press return to search. Press Esc to cancel.