La Protección De Los Neuroderechos: Reflexiones Comparadas Sobre Las Primeras Soluciones Legislativas

Abstract

Neuroscientific advances and new neurotechnology models have, on the one hand, been a remarkable tool for clinical support, but more recently, they have challenged traditional legal dogmas and safeguards protecting the brain’s identity. Intrusions into the most private sphere of humans, such as through neuroenhancement techniques, present unprecedented challenges for legal experts regarding the need to safeguard brain data from uncontrolled dissemination. The comparative reflection thus seeks to analyze the first legislative solutions developed in the Spanish context, and even more so in the Chilean context, aimed at recognizing neuro-rights as a new category of human rights. Finally, after identifying the insufficiency of a localized intervention, the article suggests adopting an international convention on the principles for protecting habeas mentem.

Keywords

neuro-rights

mental privacy

GDPR

neuroenhancement

References

Barrio Andrés, M. (2021). Carta de Derechos Digitales: ¿el preámbulo de una reforma de la Constitución española? The Conversation. https://bit.ly/3YXMu56.

Benanti, P. (2018). Postumano, troppo postumano: Neurotecnologie e human enhancement. Castelvecchi.

Boncinelli, E. (2000). Il cervello, la mente e l’anima. Mondadori.

Borbón, D. & Borbón, L. (2021). A Critical Perspective on NeuroRights: Comments Regarding Ethics and Law. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 15, 1.

Braidot, N.P. (2006). Neuromarketing: neuroeconomía y negocios. Norte-Sur.

Bravo, F. (2017). Il consenso e le altre condizioni di liceità del trattamento di dati personali. En G. Finocchiaro (Eds.), Il nuovo Regolamento europeo sulla privacy e sulla protezione dei dati personali (p. 101). Zanichelli.

Brugal, C.A. (2021). La Carta de Derechos Digitales. Derecho Digital e Innovación, 9, 1-20.

Bublitz, J.C. (2013). My Mind is Mine?! Cognitive Liberty as a Legal Concept. En E. Hildt y A. Francke (Eds.), Cognitive Enhancement (p. 233-264). Springer.

Caprioli, F. (2022), Neuroscienze e processo penale. Archivio della nuova procedura penale, 33(4), 291-310.

Cucchetti, S. (2019). Homo creativus. Nuove sfide per la bioetica. Il Regno – Attualità, 64(16), 475-478.

Lupton, D. (2016). The Quantified Self. Polity.

Desai, D.R. & Kroll, A. (2017). Trust But Verify: a Guide to Algorithms And The Law. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 31(1), 1-65.

Di Giovine, O. (2019). Ripensare il diritto penale attraverso le (neuro-)scienze? Giappichelli.

Faini, F. (2023). Intelligenza artificiale e regolazione giuridica: il ruolo del diritto nel rapporto tra uomo e macchina. Federalismi.it, 2, 1-29.

García Fernández, M. L. (2022). Los derechos digitales en la Ley Orgánica 3/2018, de Protección de Datos Personales y de garantía de los derechos digitales. Revista Parlamentaria de la Asamblea de Madrid, 42, 69-97.

Giannone Codiglione, G. (2016). Internet of things e nuovo Regolamento privacy. En S. Sica & V. D’Antonio & G.M. Riccio (Eds.). La nuova disciplina europea della privacy (pp. 131-160). Cedam.

Grion, L. (2021). Chi ha paura del post-umano? Mimesis.

Ienca, M. & Andorno, R. (2016). Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology. Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 13, 1-27.

Ienca, M. & Malgieri, G. (2022). Mental data protection and the GDPR. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 9(1), 1-19.

Imbrenda, M. (2021). Persona e scelte di consumo fra conoscenze neuroscientifiche e

nuove frontiere tecnologiche. Actualidad Jurídica Iberoamericana, 14, 814-841.

Inglese, S. & Lavazza, A. (2021). What should we do with people who cannot or do not

want to be protected from neurotechnological threats? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience,

, 1.

Jones, O.D. (2013). Seven ways neuroscience aids law. Scripta Varia, 121, 1-14.

Kosal, M. y Putney, J. (2023). Neurotechnology and international security: Predicting commercial and military adoption of brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) in the United States and China. Politics and the Life Sciences, 42(1), 81-103.

Lledó Benito, I. (2021). La robótica y la inteligencia artificial en la nueva era de la revolución industrial 4.0. Dykinson.

López-Silva, P. y Madrid, R. (2021). Sobre la Conveniencia de incluir los Neuroderechos en la Constitución o en la Ley. Revista Chilena de Derecho y Tecnología, 10(1), 53–76. https://doi.org/ndsw

Mantelero, A. (2018). AI and Big Data: A blueprint for a human rights, social and ethical impact assessment. Computer Law & Security Review, 34(4), 754-772.

McGee, G. (1998). Genetic Exceptionalism. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 11(3), 565-570.

Narváez Mora, M. (2023) Derecho e investigación neurocientífica: encuentros en la tercera fase. Diritto e questioni pubbliche, 1,113-133.

Nawrot, O. (2018), The biogenetical revolution of the Council of Europe – twenty years of the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (Oviedo Convention). Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 14(11), 1-24.

Nida-Rümelin, J. y Weidenfeld N. (2019). Umanesimo digitale. Un’etica per l’epoca dell’intelligenza artificiale. München-Berlin.

NeuroRights Initiative. (2021). The Five Ethical NeuroRights. https://bit.ly/3Z0Gys7

Perlingieri, P. (2021). Note sul «potenziamento cognitivo». Tecnologia e Diritto, 1, 209-218.

Pollicino, O. (2021). Costituzionalismo, privacy e neurodiritti. MediaLaws, 2, 9-17. https://www.medialaws.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/2-2021-Pollicino.pdf

Yuste, R., Goering, S. & Agüera y Arcas, S. (2017). Four ethical priorities for neurotechnologies and AI. Nature, 551, 159-163. https://doi.org/10.1038/551159a

Resta, G. y Zeno-Zencovich, V. (2016). La protezione transnazionale dei dati personali. Dai “safe harbour principles” al “privacy shield”. RomaTre-Press.

Santosuosso, A. (2012). Neuroscienze e diritto: un quadro delle opportunità. Rivista italiana di medicina legale, 34(1), 83-103.

Schick, A. (2005). Neuro exceptionalism? The American Journal of Bioethics, 5(2), 36-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265160590960410

Semmler, S. y Rose, Z. (2017). Artificial Intelligence: Application Today and Implications

Tomorrow. Duke Law and Technology Review, 16(1), 85-99.

Sommaggio, P., Mazzocca, M, Gerola, A. y Ferro, F. (2017). Cognitive liberty. A first step towards a human neuro-rights declaration. BioLaw Journal, 3, 27-45. https://www.research.unipd.it/retrieve/handle/11577/3266203/220169/Cognitive_ liberty._A_first_step_towards.pdf

Stanzione, M.G. (2016). Genesi e ambito di applicazione. En S. Sica, V. D’Antonio y G.M. Riccio (Eds.), La nuova disciplina europea della privacy (p. 13-31). Cedam. https://hdl.handle.net/11386/4676448

Stanzione, P. (2010). Biodiritto, postumano e diritti fondamentali. Comparazione e diritto civile, 1, 1-15. https://hdl.handle.net/11386/2600015

Tafaro, L. (2017). Neuroscienze e diritto civile: nuove prospettive. BioLaw Journal, 3, 251-272. https://doi.org/10.15168/2284-4503-268

Warren, S. y Brandeis, L. (1890). The right to privacy. Harvard Law Review, 4(5), 193- 220. https://doi.org/10.2307/1321160

Yuste, R. (2023). Neuro-Rights and New Charts of Digital Rights: A Dialogue beyond the Limits of the Law. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 30(1), 15-38. https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ijgls/vol30/iss1/3

Zoppini, A. (2014). Le domande che ci propone l’economia comportamentale ovvero il crepuscolo del «buon padre di famiglia. En G. Rojas Elgueta y N. Vardi (Eds.), Oltre il soggetto razionale. Fallimenti cognitivi e razionalità limitata nel diritto privato (pp. 11-22). Roma Tre Press. https://hdl.handle.net/11590/305290

Zúñiga-Fajuri, A., Villavicencio-Miranda, L. y Salas-Venegas, R. (2020, diciembre 11). ¿Neuroderechos? Razones para no legislar. Ciper17. https://www.ciperchile. cl/2020/12/11/neuroderechos-razones-para-no-legislar/.