Concern 883 · Working draft · editorial review in progress
Rights against automated decision-making
Rights concerning automated decisions address when a significant decision about a person may be made entirely by automated processing and what safeguards apply.
Understanding the concern
Many systems assist a person rather than make the final decision themselves. The distinction matters, but simply adding a nominal human step may not create meaningful judgment. The consequences matter too: a music recommendation and a decision with serious financial or legal effects are different situations.
GDPR Article 22 provides protections for specified solely automated decisions, with exceptions and safeguards. It is not a ban on all profiling or AI assistance. Think of a gate that decides who may enter an essential service: the important questions include what the gate controls, who really makes the decision and how it can be questioned. Other legal systems draw their own boundaries.
An example
An online process makes a consequential decision without a person genuinely reviewing the case.
Illustrative unless identified as a documented case.
Words in plain English
- AI
- Software that learns patterns from examples or uses rules to perform tasks such as recognizing images or generating text. It can make mistakes and does not understand every situation as a person would.
- GDPR
- The European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, a law about personal data. Specific duties and rights depend on the situation.
Evidence and its limits
This is a scoped description of Article 22, not a global right against every algorithm. Proposed amendments are distinct from the applicable enacted text.
European Union · Legislation
General Data Protection Regulation, Article 22 ↗ (opens in a new tab)Covers solely automated decisions with legal or similarly significant effects, with specified exceptions and safeguards. Not a universal veto on all automated assistance.
Broader frameworks and background
These resources provide context. They do not establish every claim in this concern.
- EU AI Act — high-level summary (opens in a new tab)
regulation
- Council of Europe AI Convention (opens in a new tab)
regulation
- 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 conflict (opens in a new tab)
guidance
- Artificial intelligence and machine learning in armed conflict: a human-centred approach (opens in a new tab)
position paper
- ICRC law and policy hub on AI (opens in a new tab)
guidance
People and organizations cited
Public writing, not endorsement, partnership, or affiliation.
International Committee of the Red Cross
A question to discuss
Is this decision effectively fully automated, how significant is it, and which protections apply?
Keep track of different views, what needs checking, and any next step in your own discussion notes.
Open discussion notes →Principles for the conversation
Before you finish · reflect together
Virtues and principles to consider
Virtues are qualities we practice in how we treat people and make choices. They are not scores for judging someone. Use these ideas to explore what a thoughtful response could look like.
Justice
Justice means fair treatment, fair procedures, and attention to who receives benefits and burdens. It asks whether people with less power can be heard and seek repair.
Look at outcomes across different groups and individual cases. Provide a usable way to challenge decisions and correct harm. Equal wording in a policy does not guarantee equal treatment in practice.
Ask together: Who benefits, who bears the cost, and who can challenge the decision?
Accountability
Accountability means being answerable for decisions and taking responsibility for repair. It requires more than saying that the software made the choice.
Name the person or team responsible, keep useful records, and give them authority to correct problems. Make the route to a complaint clear to the people affected.
Ask together: Who will answer for the outcome and help put things right?
Dignity
Dignity means recognizing each person's worth regardless of usefulness, status, or a system's score. People deserve respect and a voice in matters that affect them.
Explain important decisions, avoid humiliating treatment, and keep room for a person's story. Do not treat a prediction as a complete account of who someone is.
Ask together: Does this use treat each person as someone whose experience matters?
Editorial ratings
These are editorial judgments from the register, not measured probabilities or predictions about your situation.
About the register and scoring →More ways to explore
Search for more writing
For more specific or recent material, open a search below or ask for a web summary. AI-generated summaries can contain mistakes; open the original articles to check them.