III · D19 · 19.4
Right to explanation
Meaningful vs formal.
Severity
Likelihood
In the hierarchy
- Part III: Governance, Power & Existential Concerns
- D19. Rights, Law & Justice
- 19.4 Due process
Virtues and principles to explore
Held as inquiry, not as a verdict.
Justice
Justice
Who is heard, who is harmed, and who decides.
Accountability
Trust
Name who holds the consequence before it is needed.
Dignity
Center principle
Every person is a protagonist, not a data point.
Starter questions
Written to probe curiosity and learning, not accusation.
- 01What would it look like if we held “Right to explanation” with proportion rather than alarm?
- 02If we named this complication in advance, what small, reversible step would let us learn?
- 03How would we know we were getting this wrong? What would we observe, without blaming a person?
- 04What would trustworthiness look like here: what we do, what we say, and the belief others form?
Also on this branch
Who is working on it
Cited for their public writing. Citation is not endorsement, partnership, or affiliation.
- International Committee of the Red Cross
Frameworks and sources
- EU AI Act — high-level summaryregulation
- Council of Europe AI Conventionregulation
- International humanitarian law (IHL)framework
The body of law that governs the conduct of armed conflict and the protection of people who are not fighting, which applies to AI used in or for conflict.
- Deciding under algorithms: artificial intelligence and the protection of civilian infrastructure in armed conflictguidance
- Artificial intelligence and machine learning in armed conflict: a human-centred approachposition paper
- ICRC law and policy hub on AIguidance
Writing and incidents
Open indexes first. Then, if you wish, ask Grok to search the live web for this concern — one request, cached for the rest of this session.
Rights, remedies, and what the law still cannot see.