AbstractThis article offers a critical analysis of the human rights system established by ASEAN. It first investigates concrete evidence of the system’s ineffectiveness by comparing the cases of Myanmar and Thailand, which illustrate ASEAN’s failure to address human rights violations both before and after the creation of the ASEAN system. It then examines the substantive and procedural limitations of the ASEAN human rights instruments and mechanisms. Specifically, while restrictions on rights and freedoms contained in the instruments undermine the universality of human rights, ASEAN’s mechanisms lack independence and offer only weak protection mandates to address rights violations. In addition, the absence of a judicial body to hear complaints and issue binding remedies makes the system incomplete. The article recommends the creation of an ASEAN court of human rights and suggests changes to the existing instruments and mechanisms that might accommodate the new court.
The advent of artificial intelligence has shifted the outlook of great power politics over the last decade. China and the US are the main competitors in the technology front of new 'Cold War'. Big data, 5G, quantum computing, algorithmic warfare, cybersecurity, and many other concepts are getting more topical as the day wore on. Chinese social credit system, mass surveillance systems, and exportation of these technologies to the third countries are the epicentre of the vast majority of current debates. Having said that, 'Securitization Theory' plays a pivotal role in determining the realities on the ground and how societies are being affected by the AI narratives particularly produced in media and academia. Therefore, this chapter seeks to reach appropriate answers on how to reify the current status of AI-based technologies via securitization theory's significant premises.
While gamification represents one of the largest technology trends of the last decade, only a limited selection of literature exists that explores the negative outcomes of contemporary gamified services, applications, and systems. This chapter explores the consequences of gamified systems and services, investigating contemporary implementations of gamification and acknowledging the ethical concerns raised by researchers towards contemporary gamified services. This chapter further explores these ethical concerns through a critical instance case study of China's Social Credit System and arrives at informed observations on the potential for gamified cycles of reward and punishment to encourage unethical activity within organisations as well as legitimise ideological objectives that violate fundamental human rights. Recommendations are then made for researchers to explore this potential further, while recognising how gamification may justify the authority and practices of organisations, particularly those engaged in unethical and dehumanising behaviour.
Purpose: This article considers legal approaches to implementing human rights during the mass exploitation of artificial intelligence and robotic systems in public life. Methods: Within the framework of this study, an emphasis is placed on the legal regulation of artificial intelligence systems and robotics used for remote biometric identification of a person and the creation of social credit systems. This study analyzes different models of legal regulation that are typical of certain countries and regions, including the UK, USA, China, and the EU. Results: In the UK, it is allowed to use real-time face recognition systems in public spaces but the set of scenarios and situations for their use is significantly limited by legislation and law enforcement. The legal regulation of these systems in each state is based on a constant dialogue between state and civil society. The use of artificial intelligence and robotic systems to create social credit systems is tested in some countries. Modern states have formed several approaches to the creation of such systems: some of them completely prohibit these systems, while others develop a technological and regulatory framework for the creation of national systems.
The paper is devoted to the changes in fighting delinquency connected to the application of artificial intelligence and Big Data analytics. The focus of the paper has been made on the Social Credit System and related advanced mechanisms of control and surveillance, which are currently being built and implemented in China. The issue of how the latest technologies of social control impact the fight against crimes and administrative offences has been examined. The transforming effect of introduction of the Social Credit System and algorithmic mechanisms of social control upon the legal system and some of its institutions (notably, the legal liability institution, the punishment, the concept of an offender) has been assessed in the paper. The authors come to the conclusion that the introduction of the Social Credit System in China and the development of algorithmic mechanisms of social control and crime prevention may lead to the separation of punishment from the construct of legal liability and the concept of an offence as a guilty deed.
The paper is dedicated to the applications of artificial intelligence (AI) in the political sphere. The purpose of this forecasting study is to identify the prospects (for a person, society and the state) that are formed as a result of the integration of AI into the political system as one of the components. Two methods are applied by the author. Firstly, this is a discourse analysis of the positions of researchers and, secondly, the construction of scenarios based on the implicit model that was found in the studied publications. In the short term, leading nation states will be forced to expand their control over AI applications, as well as data aggregators. The reason is that AI and data aggregators can be used to manipulate mass consciousness and behavior from corporations and foreign countries. The author suggested that the formation of a political AI will create a fundamental opportunity for personification of politics regarding each individual citizen. Political AI can be used to support “intelligent” systems that provide social justice along the lines of the Chinese social credit system. The author concludes that the necessary condition for the survival of political systems is their adoption of approaches to the sovereignty of the Internet and the use of political AI.
The legacy from Christianity unquestionably lies at the root of Europe, even if not exclusively. It has taken many aspects from the Middle Ages to modern times. If the Christian heritage is diversely understood and accepted within the European Union, the reason is essentially due to its political and religious significance. However, its impact in politics and religion has often been far from negative, if we will consider what secular societies have derived from Christianity: human rights, for example, and a religious affiliation which has been part and parcel of national identity. The Christian legacy has to be acknowledged through a critical analysis which does not deny the truth of the past but should support a European project built around common values.
The Chinese Social Credit System: A Model for Other Countries?