In the hierarchy

1. Part III: Governance, Power & Existential Concerns
2. D19. Rights, Law & Justice
3. 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.

1. 01What would Dignity require of us here, before we proceed?
2. 02What might we be missing if we treat “Right to human decision-maker” only as a technical problem?
3. 03If a colleague raised this concern tomorrow, how would we receive it as inquiry rather than accusation?
4. 04What capacity would we need — in people, in the institution, in the tools — to meet this well?

Also on this branch

• Right to explanation12
• Right to contest12
• Evidence standards for AI outputs9
• Chain-of-custody for AI-generated evidence9
• Adversarial testing rights for defendants9
• Labor rights12

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.

• Building a responsible humanitarian approach: the ICRC's policy on artificial intelligenceinstitutional policy
• 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

See also exemplar policies.