International Law
Meysam Haghseresht
Abstract
Introduction Over the past decades, artificial intelligence (AI) has increasingly permeated nearly every aspect of our lives—including communication, health care, education, means of industrial production, leisure activities, culture, and even our relationships. This widespread integration has ...
Read More
Introduction Over the past decades, artificial intelligence (AI) has increasingly permeated nearly every aspect of our lives—including communication, health care, education, means of industrial production, leisure activities, culture, and even our relationships. This widespread integration has brought about dramatic changes across these fields. From a strategic and organizational standpoint, the measures of political, economic, military, and regional and global institutions reflect a growing awareness of AI’s vast potential, as well as its possible threats to society. AI holds the promise of helping humans maximize their time, freedom, and happiness. Yet, it also carries the risk of leading us toward a dystopian society. It is thus an urgent priority to strike a balance between technological advancement and the protection of human rights, as this will shape our future society. Currently, there is no standardized process for evaluating the impact of AI systems on human rights. A promising way forward is the use of AI human rights impact assessments, which can help AI developers (e.g., government agencies or businesses) anticipate and mitigate the human rights impact of AI systems, both before and after these systems are made available to the public. However, it is not always easy to grasp the range of ways AI can impact human rights. Public discussions often focus on issues like privacy and discrimination, as these are more immediately understandable and relatable. In contrast, the impact on other rights can be harder to conceptualize, making it more difficult to identify exactly how violations might occur. In this respect, the present research aimed to examine the impact of AI on the right to health, evaluating both its positive and negative effects. Although access to AI can be justified under the right to development within the framework of international human rights, its negative effects on the right to health present a significant challenge. Therefore, alongside acknowledging the potential harms, it is necessary to take measures to balance technological advancement with the protection of human rights. To address this challenge, the study first evaluated AI services vis-à-vis the fundamental components of the right to health. Then it explored the specific rights related to health, and finally, analyzed the results. The research questions are as follows: What are the effects of AI on the right to health? And how can we reduce the negative effects of AI on the right to health?Literature ReviewAlthough some researches have discussed the impact of AI on human rights in general, only a few have focused on specific rights—such as the right to work. At the same time, there is valuable literature in the field of medicine addressing the impact of AI. The present research contributes to the discussion through its precise and focused analysis of the effects of AI on the right to health.Materials and MethodsThis research employed a descriptive method to examine the fundamental components of the right to health, as well as the related rights that have been influenced by AI. In addition, an analytical method was used to evaluate both the positive and negative effects of AI on the right to health. Results and DiscussionThe rights to health and technology have become more interconnected than ever, as AI increasingly permeates various aspects of human life. Despite concerns, the significant benefits of AI for human life and personality have prevented any halt in its progress. However, threats arising from the misuse of AI can be intentional, negligent, accidental, or stem from a lack of anticipation and preparedness for its transformative impact on society. It is thus essential to address the root causes of these threats in order to ensure security and safety. The current analysis examined the extent and nature of AI’s impact on the fundamental components of the right to health and related rights. The findings showed both fear and hope. While AI offers many positive effects, gaps in its application raise significant fears. Therefore, it is crucial to establish a regulatory framework for the development and use of AI and robotics that upholds and respects human dignity. Given the unique features of AI, monitoring systems for verification and continuous oversight must also be tailored accordingly. Decisions increasingly rely on these systems, yet there is often a lack of transparency, accountability, and safeguards regarding their design, function, and evolution over time. In addition, the inherent uncertainty surrounding AI adds to the complexity of this challenge. Moreover, the environmental impact of AI (e.g., pollution) contributes to serious risks to human health. Without adequate safeguards, oversight, and protection of human rights in the development and deployment of AI, the health and well-being of both current and future generations will be jeopardized. To responsibly advance AI and harness its benefits, policymakers must carefully consider its effects on a broad range of fundamental rights and freedoms protected by human rights instruments. Finally, ensuring equitable access to AI—based on the principle of non-discrimination—remains a vital concern.ConclusionAI in the health sector presents both opportunities and challenges for the right to health. On the one hand, it offers undeniable benefits such as improved diagnosis and treatment, more equitable access to healthcare services, and increased efficiency within health systems. On the other hand, serious concerns arise from algorithmic discrimination, violations of privacy, and reduced accountability. To address these risks, it is essential to develop comprehensive regulatory frameworks grounded in human rights principles. Such frameworks should ensure algorithmic transparency, data diversity, institutional accountability, and equitable access to technology. Only by balancing innovation and ethics can we achieve a future in which AI not only enhances physical health, but also human dignity and rights.
seyed ghasem zamani
Abstract
Religious freedom is one of the most fundamental human rights which has been embodied and recognized in essential universal and regional human rights instruments, including universal declaration on human rights, international convent on civil and political rights, European convention on human rights, ...
Read More
Religious freedom is one of the most fundamental human rights which has been embodied and recognized in essential universal and regional human rights instruments, including universal declaration on human rights, international convent on civil and political rights, European convention on human rights, American convention on human rights, African charter on human and people rights and Islamic declaration on human rights. Most of these instruments provide that Freedom of religion may be subject to conditions and restrictions such as national security, public safety and protection of health or morals. European Court of Human Rights, as a judicial body of European convention, in its jurisprudence determinate the scope of margin of appreciation. In this article, margin of appreciation and States maneuver in interpretation and implementation of religious freedom were analyzed in light of the jurisprudence of European Court of Human Rights
Reza Maghsoudi
Abstract
Human rights norms have caused some evolutions in the scope of forum conflicts, conflict of laws and recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. Use of traditional rules in this branch of law such as unilateral conflict rules has been questioned and some ancient connecting factors, such as nationality ...
Read More
Human rights norms have caused some evolutions in the scope of forum conflicts, conflict of laws and recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. Use of traditional rules in this branch of law such as unilateral conflict rules has been questioned and some ancient connecting factors, such as nationality have been periled. In the area of foreign judgments recognition, human rights regulations have also persuaded states to accept acquired rights abroad. However, necessities of public international law, states interests, human rights limits, like proportionality and public order considerations have decreased human rights effects on private international law and especially forum conflicts. In this paper we will first discuss the concept of public order and its relationship to human rights, and then human rights norms in each private international law issues will be analyzed with regard to the judgements of European Court of Human Rights
