Joint Committee calls for AI Bill to address severe threat to human rights

In a comprehensive report, Parliament's Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) has called for a new Artificial Intelligence (AI) Bill to address serious threats posed to fundamental rights, warning that the current UK legal framework is fragmented and incapable of managing rapid technological advancements.

In the press release, Committee Chair Alex Sobel said no country currently has an AI regulatory framework fit for purpose. Existing domestic laws largely apply only at the point of deployment, shifting liability onto end users rather than designers. Furthermore, regulators are currently unable to evaluate systems prior to public release or block high-risk models, while engagement with the AI Security Institute (AISI) remains entirely voluntary and lacks statutory backing.

The Committee warned that privacy and data protection rights are under serious threat. This includes through non-transparent automated decision-making, which threatens the public's right to an effective remedy, with risks falling disproportionately on Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) communities. The Committee stressed that merely having a human in the loop fails to guarantee meaningful intervention under existing UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) rules.

To address regulatory gaps, the report recommends introducing an AI bill based on a tiered, risk-based regime. Under this structure, low-risk systems would face lighter compliance requirements to preserve commercial innovation, whilst higher-risk models would undergo strict oversight throughout their entire lifecycle. The Committee argued that certain applications incompatible with human rights, such as subliminal manipulation and inappropriate biometric profiling, should be prohibited following public consultation, with other high-risk systems requiring mandatory pre-market approval.

The proposed legislation would enforce supply-chain due diligence and require developers and deployers to provide clear transparency notices explaining when and how AI is used. An independent AI regulator should be established on a statutory basis. This body would act as a central point for public complaints, establish operational codes of practice, monitor systemic risks, and wield formal enforcement powers to penalise non-compliance. 

In related news, Decision Marketing reports that the DMA (Data & Marketing Association) UK told the Committee that while the trade body agrees with the diagnosis, the answer is not necessarily more legislation.

Attending a Data & AI Engagement Day earlier this month, DMA director of policy and public affairs Michael Sturrock explained that instead of new legislation, the ICO should enforce the GDPR first and then plug any gaps with new legislation down the line.  

Training Announcement: The BCS Foundation Certificate in AI examines the challenges and risks associated with AI projects, such as those related to privacy, transparency and potential biases in algorithms that could lead to unintended consequences. Explore the role of data, effective risk management strategies, compliance requirements, and ongoing governance of the AI lifecycle and become a certified AI Governance professional. Find out more.