Implementing human rights principles in tech
Over the course of this Human Rights Campaign week, techUK’s members and partners explored a wide range of issues across the tech and human rights landscape which paint an intriguing picture as to how human rights are conceptualised and implemented today, and raising important questions as to where we go from here.
In 1948, the United Nations General Assembly proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHD), notable for being the first global, official, and comprehensive agreement that declared all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights; this has become the basis of our international system, underpinning everything from treaties to national legal codes.
However, the implementation of these “fundamental” rights is still evolving. Internationally, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct (the Guidelines) form a foundation in which not only states but companies are subject to specific human rights obligations.
Legal obligations
In the UK, the 2015 Modern Slavery Act was initially a landmark, world-leading piece legislation aimed at combating modern slavery and human trafficking in supply chains. Today, it is outdated at best, outstripped by other jurisdictions, such as the EU’s CSRD and CSDDD. The government is well aware of these issues, as well as calls to implement mandatory measures for companies to “identify, prioritise, prevent, mitigate and account for” adverse impacts in their operations and supply chains, known as human rights due diligence (HRDD), and as such launched a responsible business conduct review last year.
Led by the Department for Business and Trade (DBT), the review is focused on global supply chains of businesses operating in the UK and is “exploring policy options” to support responsible business practices domestically, as well as protecting UK competitiveness by promoting a “coordinated” approach and championing international standards and frameworks. Additionally, they are “refreshing” the OECD Guideline’s National Contact Point (NCP) to become the Office for Responsible Business. In typical government fashion, there is no end date for the review, and multiple departments are involved across various workstreams.
Nevertheless, the review is inherently as complex as it is important. Any attempt by a single country to implement legislation which a) applies extraterritorially and b) attempts to hold companies to account will inevitably run into challenges; tech companies are keenly aware of the need to address risks in supply chains, and as such have been consistently engaging with government. Perhaps, there is credence in an approach which mirrors our largest trading partner, reducing burden for businesses and leveraging collective economic power to encourage human rights considerations globally.
Ethical considerations
Taking a step back, a particularly popular topic this week has been considering how the development of new technologies, particularly AI, can have regard for and maintain fundamental human rights as a moral and ethical prerogative. Across the contributions, there was a shared recognition that rights‑respecting technology does not emerge by accident; it requires conscious choices about design, purpose, and oversight.
The importance of these conversations cannot be understated, given the clear impact of emerging technologies on our workforce and everyday lives and seems to coalesce around common principles of transparency about how systems function; meaningful routes for understanding and challenging automated decisions; and an early, deliberate integration of human impact considerations into the design process. Interestingly, these principles are no longer framed simply as good practice but rather are being understood as foundational conditions for trust.
Many questions remain – including, how can tech businesses anticipate and adapt to emerging human rights impacts, especially when technologies are evolving faster than governance? Beyond imagining what could be, discussing what should be, or assessing what is, these conversations are shaping direction that will be taken – here in the UK, and internationally – on human rights.
In many ways, this week has been a reminder that despite the prevalence of a disheartening news cycle, “human rights” remain integral to the principles which uphold our legal system, and those which guide the development of emerging technologies, in a way which was likely unimaginable in 1948. Additionally, as technology is constantly being deployed in efforts to improve and enhance human rights, it becomes apparent that it is intrinsically embedded in the conversation around human rights and invested in the outcome.
Authors
