Tag: Chile-neurorights

2 articles

Policy & Regulation

UN Secretary-General recommends banning coercive use of neurotechnology in justice systems

In a report to the UN General Assembly dated 27 August 2026 (A/81/351), Secretary-General António Guterres recommends that member states prohibit the compulsory or coercive use of neurotechnology in the administration of justice, including brain-based deception detection, predictive applications, decoding applications that claim to read thoughts, intentions or memories, neuromodulation, and arbitrary or unlawful cognitive surveillance and monitoring. He asks states to recognise neural data as highly sensitive personal data with the highest level of legal protection and clear limits on its collection, processing, sale, storage, retention, reuse and sharing, to require free, prior, informed, explicit and revocable consent for any use of neurotechnology in justice settings, and to urge neurotechnology companies to carry out human rights due diligence. The report, requested by the General Assembly in December 2024, warns, citing outside research, that neural data gathered by consumer devices may be accessed by state authorities or introduced as evidence. Its recommendations do not bind governments.

Oct 11

Policy & Regulation

India's DPDPA treats brain signals like a shopping cart, a legal scholar argues

In a LiveLaw analysis published 30 August 2026, CHRIST University Assistant Professor Namit Srivastava argues that India's Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 applies the same consent framework to neural data as it applies to a shopping cart, and that MeitY should add neural data as a sensitive category via delegated rule-making under Section 40 without reopening the Act. The piece is legal-scholar analysis, not Indian government policy. It lands two days after the 28 August ADI Neuroscience US$1 billion India neurotech fund announcement.

Aug 30