?
Права человека в реалиях нейропрогресса: юридические средства компенсации нейротехнологических рисков
Human rights and freedoms are grounded in the necessity for both physical and mental autonomy. The advent of neurotechnologies, which facilitate contactless interactions with the human brain, has notably increased the risks associated with manipulating individual consciousness. Core human rights and freedoms—such as freedom of thought, speech, conscience, privacy, and the confidentiality of personal and family matters—now face significant threats.
In light of these developments, there is an urgent need for a revised understanding of these rights and freedoms, along with updates to the legal mechanisms that protect them, particularly as they relate to the impact of neuroscience. This growing concern has led to the emergence of the concept of neurolaw and initiated a process aimed at revising international laws pertaining to neurotechnology under the auspices of the United Nations.
This article seeks to analyze the concept of neuro rights and explore how the legal interpretations of fundamental human rights and freedoms are evolving in response to advancements in neurotechnology. The study aims to develop a methodology for addressing neuro-risks through legal means, utilizing mechanisms from international public law as well as the private law institution of copyright.
The research outlines the concept of human neuro-rights and presents the primary approaches to establishing this new branch of law. It proposes an updated interpretation of human rights and freedoms within the context of contemporary neurotechnological challenges. Additionally, it assesses the United Nations' methodology for enhancing current international legal frameworks to mitigate neurotechnological threats to human rights, recognizing it as effective.
The article's scientific and practical contribution includes a proposed concept for employing copyright mechanisms to prevent neuro-risks in private law relations, particularly concerning the hazardous implications of unlawfully replicating an individual's personality.