sage-governance 1.0.0

package/rules/general/UNESCO_AI_Ethics.md

@@ -0,0 +1,237 @@
+# **Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence** 
+
+## **PREAMBLE** 
+
+The General Conference of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), meeting in Paris from 9 to 24 November 2021, at its 41st session, 
+
+_**Recognizing**_ the profound and dynamic positive and negative impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) on societies, environment, ecosystems and human lives, including the human mind, in part because of the new ways in which its use influences human thinking, interaction and decision-making and affects education, human, social and natural sciences, culture, and communication and information, 
+
+_**Recalling**_ that, by the terms of its Constitution, UNESCO seeks to contribute to peace and security by promoting collaboration among nations through education, the sciences, culture, and communication and information, in order to further universal respect for justice, for the rule of law and for the human rights and fundamental freedoms which are affirmed for the peoples of the world, 
+
+_**Convinced**_ that the Recommendation presented here, as a standard-setting instrument developed through a global approach, based on international law, focusing on human dignity and human rights, as well as gender equality, social and economic justice and development, physical and mental well-being, diversity, interconnectedness, inclusiveness, and environmental and ecosystem protection can guide AI technologies in a responsible direction, 
+
+_**Guided**_ by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, 
+
+_**Considering**_ that AI technologies can be of great service to humanity and all countries can benefit from them, but also raise fundamental ethical concerns, for instance regarding the biases they can embed and exacerbate, potentially resulting in discrimination, inequality, digital divides, exclusion and a threat to cultural, social and biological diversity and social or economic divides; the need for transparency and understandability of the workings of algorithms and the data with which they have been trained; and their potential impact on, including but not limited to, human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms, gender equality, democracy, social, economic, political and cultural processes, scientific and engineering practices, animal welfare, and the environment and ecosystems, 
+
+_**Also recognizing**_ that AI technologies can deepen existing divides and inequalities in the world, within and between countries, and that justice, trust and fairness must be upheld so that no country and no one should be left behind, either by having fair access to AI technologies and enjoying their benefits or in the protection against their negative implications, while recognizing the different circumstances of different countries and respecting the desire of some people not to take part in all technological developments, 
+
+_**Conscious**_ of the fact that all countries are facing an acceleration in the use of information and communication technologies and AI technologies, as well as an increasing need for media and information literacy, and that the digital economy presents important societal, economic and environmental challenges and opportunities of benefit-sharing, especially for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), including but not limited to least developed countries (LDCs), landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) and small island developing States (SIDS), requiring the recognition, protection and promotion of endogenous cultures, values and knowledge in order to develop sustainable digital economies, 
+
+_**Further recognizing**_ that AI technologies have the potential to be beneficial to the environment and ecosystems, and in order for those benefits to be realized, potential harms to and negative impacts on the environment and ecosystems should not be ignored but instead addressed, 
+
+_**Noting**_ that addressing risks and ethical concerns should not hamper innovation and development but rather provide new opportunities and stimulate ethically-conducted research and innovation that anchor AI technologies in human rights and fundamental freedoms, values and principles, and moral and ethical reflection, 
+
+_**Also recalling**_ that in November 2019, the General Conference of UNESCO, at its 40th session, adopted 40 C/Resolution 37, by which it mandated the Director-General “to prepare an international standard-setting instrument on the ethics of artificial intelligence (AI) in the form of a recommendation”, which is to be submitted to the General Conference at its 41st session in 2021, 
+
+_**Recognizing**_ that the development of AI technologies necessitates a commensurate increase in data, media and information literacy as well as access to independent, pluralistic, trusted sources of information, including as part of efforts to mitigate risks of misinformation, disinformation and hate speech, and harm caused through the misuse of personal data, 
+
+_**Observing**_ that a normative framework for AI technologies and its social implications finds its basis in international and national legal frameworks, human rights and fundamental freedoms, ethics, need for access to data, information and knowledge, the freedom of research and innovation, human and environmental and ecosystem well-being, and connects ethical values and principles to the challenges and opportunities linked to AI technologies, based on common understanding and shared aims, 
+
+_**Also recognizing**_ that ethical values and principles can help develop and implement rightsbased policy measures and legal norms, by providing guidance with a view to the fast pace of technological development, 
+
+_**Also convinced**_ that globally accepted ethical standards for AI technologies, in full respect of international law, in particular human rights law, can play a key role in developing AI-related norms across the globe, 
+
+_**Bearing in mind**_ the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the instruments of the international human rights framework, including the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (1951), the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention (1958), the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1965), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (1979), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006), the Convention against Discrimination in Education (1960), the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (2005), as well as any other relevant international instruments, recommendations and declarations, 
+
+_**Also noting**_ the United Nations Declaration on the Right to Development (1986); the Declaration on the Responsibilities of the Present Generations Towards Future Generations (1997); the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (2005); the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007); the United Nations General Assembly resolution on the review of the World Summit on the Information Society (A/RES/70/125) (2015); the United Nations General Assembly Resolution on Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (A/RES/70/1) (2015); the Recommendation Concerning the Preservation of, and Access to, Documentary Heritage Including in Digital Form (2015); the Declaration of Ethical Principles in relation to Climate Change (2017); the Recommendation on Science and Scientific Researchers (2017); the Internet Universality Indicators (endorsed by UNESCO’s International Programme for the Development of Communication in 2018), including the ROAM principles (endorsed by UNESCO’s General Conference in 2015); the Human Rights Council’s resolution on “The right to privacy in the digital age” (A/HRC/RES/42/15) (2019); and the Human Rights Council’s resolution on “New and emerging digital technologies and human rights” (A/HRC/RES/41/11) (2019), 
+
+_**Emphasizing**_ that specific attention must be paid to LMICs, including but not limited to LDCs, LLDCs and SIDS, as they have their own capacity but have been underrepresented in the AI ethics debate, which raises concerns about neglecting local knowledge, cultural pluralism, value systems and the demands of global fairness to deal with the positive and negative impacts of AI technologies, 
+
+_**Also conscious**_ of the many existing national policies, other frameworks and initiatives elaborated by relevant United Nations entities, intergovernmental organizations, including regional organizations, as well as those by the private sector, professional organizations, nongovernmental organizations, and the scientific community, related to the ethics and regulation of AI technologies, 
+
+_**Further convinced**_ that AI technologies can bring important benefits, but that achieving them can also amplify tension around innovation, asymmetric access to knowledge and technologies, including the digital and civic literacy deficit that limits the public’s ability to engage in topics related to AI, as well as barriers to access to information and gaps in capacity, human and institutional capacities, barriers to access to technological innovation, and a lack of adequate physical and digital infrastructure and regulatory frameworks, including those related to data, all of which need to be addressed, 
+
+_**Underlining**_ that the strengthening of global cooperation and solidarity, including through multilateralism, is needed to facilitate fair access to AI technologies and address the challenges that they bring to diversity and interconnectivity of cultures and ethical systems, to mitigate potential misuse, to realize the full potential that AI can bring, especially in the area of development, and to ensure that national AI strategies are guided by ethical principles, 
+
+_**Taking fully into account**_ that the rapid development of AI technologies challenges their ethical implementation and governance, as well as the respect for and protection of cultural diversity, and has the potential to disrupt local and regional ethical standards and values, 
+
+1. _**Adopts**_ the present Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence on this twenty-third day of November 2021; 
+
+2. _**Recommends**_ that Member States apply on a voluntary basis the provisions of this Recommendation by taking appropriate steps, including whatever legislative or other measures may be required, in conformity with the constitutional practice and governing structures of each State, to give effect within their jurisdictions to the principles and norms of the Recommendation in conformity with international law, including international human rights law; 
+
+3. _**Also recommends**_ that Member States engage all stakeholders, including business enterprises, to ensure that they play their respective roles in the implementation of this Recommendation; and bring the Recommendation to the attention of the authorities, bodies, research and academic organizations, institutions and organizations in public, private and civil society sectors involved in AI technologies, so that the development and use of AI technologies are guided by both sound scientific research as well as ethical analysis and evaluation. 
+
+## **I. SCOPE OF APPLICATION** 
+
+1. This Recommendation addresses ethical issues related to the domain of Artificial Intelligence to the extent that they are within UNESCO’s mandate. It approaches AI ethics as a systematic normative reflection, based on a holistic, comprehensive, multicultural and evolving framework of interdependent values, principles and actions that can guide societies in dealing responsibly with the known and unknown impacts of AI technologies on human beings, societies and the environment and ecosystems, and offers them a basis to accept or reject AI technologies. It considers ethics as a dynamic basis for the normative evaluation and guidance of AI technologies, referring to human dignity, well-being and the prevention of harm as a compass and as rooted in the ethics of science and technology. 
+
+2. This Recommendation does not have the ambition to provide one single definition of AI, since such a definition would need to change over time, in accordance with technological developments. Rather, its ambition is to address those features of AI systems that are of central ethical relevance. Therefore, this Recommendation approaches AI systems as systems which have the capacity to process data and information in a way that resembles intelligent behaviour, and typically includes aspects of reasoning, learning, perception, prediction, planning or control. Three elements have a central place in this approach: 
+
+   - (a) AI systems are information-processing technologies that integrate models and algorithms that produce a capacity to learn and to perform cognitive tasks leading to outcomes such as prediction and decision-making in material and virtual environments. AI systems are designed to operate with varying degrees of autonomy by means of knowledge modelling and representation and by exploiting data and calculating correlations. AI systems may include several methods, such as but not limited to: 
+
+      - (i) machine learning, including deep learning and reinforcement learning; 
+
+      - (ii) machine reasoning, including planning, scheduling, knowledge representation and reasoning, search, and optimization. 
+
+   AI systems can be used in cyber-physical systems, including the Internet of things, robotic systems, social robotics, and human-computer interfaces, which involve control, perception, the processing of data collected by sensors, and the operation of actuators in the environment in which AI systems work. 
+
+   - (b) Ethical questions regarding AI systems pertain to all stages of the AI system life cycle, understood here to range from research, design and development to deployment and use, including maintenance, operation, trade, financing, monitoring and evaluation, validation, end-of-use, disassembly and termination. In addition, AI actors can be defined as any actor involved in at least one stage of the AI system life cycle, and can refer both to natural and legal persons, such as researchers, programmers, engineers, data scientists, end-users, business enterprises, universities and public and private entities, among others. 
+
+   - (c) AI systems raise new types of ethical issues that include, but are not limited to, their impact on decision-making, employment and labour, social interaction, health care, education, media, access to information, digital divide, personal data and consumer protection, environment, democracy, rule of law, security and policing, dual use, and human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of expression, privacy and non-discrimination. Furthermore, new ethical challenges are created by the potential of AI algorithms to reproduce and reinforce existing biases, and thus to exacerbate already existing forms of discrimination, prejudice and stereotyping. Some of these issues are related to the capacity of AI systems to perform tasks which previously only living beings could do, and which were in some cases even limited to human beings only. These characteristics give AI systems a profound, new role in human practices and society, as well as in their relationship with the environment and ecosystems, creating a new context for children and young people to grow up in, develop an understanding of the world and themselves, critically understand media and information, and learn to make decisions. In the long term, AI systems could challenge humans’ special sense of experience and agency, raising additional concerns about, inter alia, human self-understanding, social, cultural and environmental interaction, autonomy, agency, worth and dignity. 
+
+3. This Recommendation pays specific attention to the broader ethical implications of AI systems in relation to the central domains of UNESCO: education, science, culture, and communication and information, as explored in the 2019 Preliminary Study on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence by the UNESCO World Commission on Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology (COMEST): 
+
+   - (a) Education, because living in digitalizing societies requires new educational practices, ethical reflection, critical thinking, responsible design practices and new skills, given the implications for the labour market, employability and civic participation. 
+
+   - (b) Science, in the broadest sense and including all academic fields from the natural sciences and medical sciences to the social sciences and humanities, as AI technologies bring new research capacities and approaches, have implications for our concepts of scientific understanding and explanation, and create a new basis for decision-making. 
+
+   - (c) Cultural identity and diversity, as AI technologies can enrich cultural and creative industries, but can also lead to an increased concentration of supply of cultural content, data, markets and income in the hands of only a few actors, with potential negative implications for the diversity and pluralism of languages, media, cultural expressions, participation and equality. 
+
+   - (d) Communication and information, as AI technologies play an increasingly important role in the processing, structuring and provision of information; the issues of automated journalism and the algorithmic provision of news and moderation and curation of content on social media and search engines are just a few examples raising issues related to access to information, disinformation, misinformation, hate speech, the emergence of new forms of societal narratives, discrimination, freedom of expression, privacy and media and information literacy, among others. 
+
+4. This Recommendation is addressed to Member States, both as AI actors and as authorities responsible for developing legal and regulatory frameworks throughout the entire AI system life cycle, and for promoting business responsibility. It also provides ethical guidance to all AI actors, including the public and private sectors, by providing a basis for an ethical impact assessment of AI systems throughout their life cycle. 
+
+## **II. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES** 
+
+5. This Recommendation aims to provide a basis to make AI systems work for the good of humanity, individuals, societies and the environment and ecosystems, and to prevent harm. It also aims at stimulating the peaceful use of AI systems. 
+
+6. In addition to the existing ethical frameworks regarding AI around the world, this Recommendation aims to bring a globally accepted normative instrument that focuses not only on the articulation of values and principles, but also on their practical realization, via concrete policy recommendations, with a strong emphasis on inclusion issues of gender equality and protection of the environment and ecosystems. 
+
+7. Because the complexity of the ethical issues surrounding AI necessitates the cooperation of multiple stakeholders across the various levels and sectors of international, regional and national communities, this Recommendation aims to enable stakeholders to take shared responsibility based on a global and intercultural dialogue. 
+
+8. The objectives of this Recommendation are: 
+
+   - (a) to provide a universal framework of values, principles and actions to guide States in the formulation of their legislation, policies or other instruments regarding AI, consistent with international law; 
+
+   - (b) to guide the actions of individuals, groups, communities, institutions and private sector companies to ensure the embedding of ethics in all stages of the AI system life cycle; 
+
+   - (c) to protect, promote and respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, human dignity and equality, including gender equality; to safeguard the interests of present and future generations; to preserve the environment, biodiversity and ecosystems; and to respect cultural diversity in all stages of the AI system life cycle; 
+
+   - (d) to foster multi-stakeholder, multidisciplinary and pluralistic dialogue and consensus building about ethical issues relating to AI systems; 
+
+   - (e) to promote equitable access to developments and knowledge in the field of AI and the sharing of benefits, with particular attention to the needs and contributions of LMICs, including LDCs, LLDCs and SIDS. 
+
+## **III. VALUES AND PRINCIPLES** 
+
+9. The values and principles included below should be respected by all actors in the AI system life cycle, in the first place and, where needed and appropriate, be promoted through amendments to the existing and elaboration of new legislation, regulations and business guidelines. This must comply with international law, including the United Nations Charter and Member States’ human rights obligations, and should be in line with internationally agreed social, political, environmental, educational, scientific and economic sustainability objectives, such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). 
+
+10. Values play a powerful role as motivating ideals in shaping policy measures and legal norms. While the set of values outlined below thus inspires desirable behaviour and represents the foundations of principles, the principles unpack the values underlying them more concretely so that the values can be more easily operationalized in policy statements and actions. 
+
+11. While all the values and principles outlined below are desirable per se, in any practical contexts, there may be tensions between these values and principles. In any given situation, a contextual assessment will be necessary to manage potential tensions, taking into account the principle of proportionality and in compliance with human rights and fundamental freedoms. In all cases, any possible limitations on human rights and fundamental freedoms must have a lawful basis, and be reasonable, necessary and proportionate, and consistent with States’ obligations under international law. To navigate such scenarios judiciously will typically require engagement with a broad range of appropriate stakeholders, making use of social dialogue, as well as ethical deliberation, due diligence and impact assessment. 
+
+12. The trustworthiness and integrity of the life cycle of AI systems is essential to ensure that AI technologies will work for the good of humanity, individuals, societies and the environment and ecosystems, and embody the values and principles set out in this Recommendation. People should have good reason to trust that AI systems can bring individual and shared benefits, while adequate measures are taken to mitigate risks. An essential requirement for trustworthiness is that, throughout their life cycle, AI systems are subject to thorough monitoring by the relevant stakeholders as appropriate. As trustworthiness is an outcome of the operationalization of the principles in this document, the policy actions proposed in this Recommendation are all directed at promoting trustworthiness in all stages of the AI system life cycle. 
+
+## **III.1 VALUES** 
+
+### **Respect, protection and promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms and human dignity** 
+
+13. The inviolable and inherent dignity of every human constitutes the foundation for the universal, indivisible, inalienable, interdependent and interrelated system of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Therefore, respect, protection and promotion of human dignity and rights as established by international law, including international human rights law, is essential throughout the life cycle of AI systems. Human dignity relates to the recognition of the intrinsic and equal worth of each individual human being, regardless of race, colour, descent, gender, age, language, religion, political opinion, national origin, ethnic origin, social origin, economic or social condition of birth, or disability and any other grounds. 
+
+14. No human being or human community should be harmed or subordinated, whether physically, economically, socially, politically, culturally or mentally during any phase of the life cycle of AI systems. Throughout the life cycle of AI systems, the quality of life of human beings should be enhanced, while the definition of “quality of life” should be left open to individuals or groups, as long as there is no violation or abuse of human rights and fundamental freedoms, or the dignity of humans in terms of this definition. 
+
+15. Persons may interact with AI systems throughout their life cycle and receive assistance from them, such as care for vulnerable people or people in vulnerable situations, including but not limited to children, older persons, persons with disabilities or the ill. Within such interactions, persons should never be objectified, nor should their dignity be otherwise undermined, or human rights and fundamental freedoms violated or abused. 
+
+16. Human rights and fundamental freedoms must be respected, protected and promoted throughout the life cycle of AI systems. Governments, private sector, civil society, international organizations, technical communities and academia must respect human rights instruments and frameworks in their interventions in the processes surrounding the life cycle of AI systems. New technologies need to provide new means to advocate, defend and exercise human rights and not to infringe them. 
+
+### **Environment and ecosystem flourishing** 
+
+17. Environmental and ecosystem flourishing should be recognized, protected and promoted through the life cycle of AI systems. Furthermore, environment and ecosystems are the existential necessity for humanity and other living beings to be able to enjoy the benefits of advances in AI. 
+
+18. All actors involved in the life cycle of AI systems must comply with applicable international law and domestic legislation, standards and practices, such as precaution, designed for environmental and ecosystem protection and restoration, and sustainable development. They should reduce the environmental impact of AI systems, including but not limited to its carbon footprint, to ensure the minimization of climate change and environmental risk factors, and prevent the unsustainable exploitation, use and transformation of natural resources contributing to the deterioration of the environment and the degradation of ecosystems. 
+
+### **Ensuring diversity and inclusiveness** 
+
+19. Respect, protection and promotion of diversity and inclusiveness should be ensured throughout the life cycle of AI systems, consistent with international law, including human rights law. This may be done by promoting active participation of all individuals or groups regardless of race, colour, descent, gender, age, language, religion, political opinion, national origin, ethnic origin, social origin, economic or social condition of birth, or disability and any other grounds. 
+
+20. The scope of lifestyle choices, beliefs, opinions, expressions or personal experiences, including the optional use of AI systems and the co-design of these architectures should not be restricted during any phase of the life cycle of AI systems. 
+
+21.  Furthermore, efforts, including international cooperation, should be made to overcome, and never take advantage of, the lack of necessary technological infrastructure, education and skills, as well as legal frameworks, particularly in LMICs, LDCs, LLDCs and SIDS, affecting communities. 
+
+### **Living in peaceful, just and interconnected societies** 
+
+22. AI actors should play a participative and enabling role to ensure peaceful and just societies, which is based on an interconnected future for the benefit of all, consistent with human rights and fundamental freedoms. The value of living in peaceful and just societies points to the potential of AI systems to contribute throughout their life cycle to the interconnectedness of all living creatures with each other and with the natural environment. 
+
+23. The notion of humans being interconnected is based on the knowledge that every human belongs to a greater whole, which thrives when all its constituent parts are enabled to thrive. Living in peaceful, just and interconnected societies requires an organic, immediate, uncalculated bond of solidarity, characterized by a permanent search for peaceful relations, tending towards care for others and the natural environment in the broadest sense of the term. 
+
+24. This value demands that peace, inclusiveness and justice, equity and interconnectedness should be promoted throughout the life cycle of AI systems, in so far as the processes of the life cycle of AI systems should not segregate, objectify or undermine freedom and autonomous decision-making as well as the safety of human beings and communities, divide and turn individuals and groups against each other, or threaten the coexistence between humans, other living beings and the natural environment. 
+
+## **III.2 PRINCIPLES** 
+
+### **Proportionality and Do No Harm** 
+
+25. It should be recognized that AI technologies do not necessarily, per se, ensure human and environmental and ecosystem flourishing. Furthermore, none of the processes related to the AI system life cycle shall exceed what is necessary to achieve legitimate aims or objectives and should be appropriate to the context. In the event of possible occurrence of any harm to human beings, human rights and fundamental freedoms, communities and society at large or the environment and ecosystems, the implementation of procedures for risk assessment and the adoption of measures in order to preclude the occurrence of such harm should be ensured. 
+
+26. The choice to use AI systems and which AI method to use should be justified in the following ways: (a) the AI method chosen should be appropriate and proportional to achieve a given legitimate aim; (b) the AI method chosen should not infringe upon the foundational values captured in this document, in particular, its use must not violate or abuse human rights; and (c) the AI method should be appropriate to the context and should be based on rigorous scientific foundations. In scenarios where decisions are understood to have an impact that is irreversible or difficult to reverse or may involve life and death decisions, final human determination should apply. In particular, AI systems should not be used for social scoring or mass surveillance purposes. 
+
+### **Safety and security** 
+
+27. Unwanted harms (safety risks), as well as vulnerabilities to attack (security risks) should be avoided and should be addressed, prevented and eliminated throughout the life cycle of AI systems to ensure human, environmental and ecosystem safety and security. Safe and secure AI will be enabled by the development of sustainable, privacy-protective data access frameworks that foster better training and validation of AI models utilizing quality data. 
+
+### **Fairness and non-discrimination** 
+
+28. AI actors should promote social justice and safeguard fairness and non-discrimination of any kind in compliance with international law. This implies an inclusive approach to ensuring that the benefits of AI technologies are available and accessible to all, taking into consideration the specific needs of different age groups, cultural systems, different language groups, persons with disabilities, girls and women, and disadvantaged, marginalized and vulnerable people or people in vulnerable situations. Member States should work to promote inclusive access for all, including local communities, to AI systems with locally relevant content and services, and with respect for multilingualism and cultural diversity. Member States should work to tackle digital divides and ensure inclusive access to and participation in the development of AI. At the national level, Member States should promote equity between rural and urban areas, and among all persons regardless of race, colour, descent, gender, age, language, religion, political opinion, national origin, ethnic origin, social origin, economic or social condition of birth, or disability and any other grounds, in terms of access to and participation in the AI system life cycle. At the international level, the most technologically advanced countries have a responsibility of solidarity with the least advanced to ensure that the benefits of AI technologies are shared such that access to and participation in the AI system life cycle for the latter contributes to a fairer world order with regard to information, communication, culture, education, research and socio-economic and political stability. 
+
+29. AI actors should make all reasonable efforts to minimize and avoid reinforcing or perpetuating discriminatory or biased applications and outcomes throughout the life cycle of the AI system to ensure fairness of such systems. Effective remedy should be available against discrimination and biased algorithmic determination. 
+
+30. Furthermore, digital and knowledge divides within and between countries need to be addressed throughout an AI system life cycle, including in terms of access and quality of access to technology and data, in accordance with relevant national, regional and international legal frameworks, as well as in terms of connectivity, knowledge and skills and meaningful participation of the affected communities, such that every person is treated equitably. 
+
+### **Sustainability** 
+
+31. The development of sustainable societies relies on the achievement of a complex set of objectives on a continuum of human, social, cultural, economic and environmental dimensions. The advent of AI technologies can either benefit sustainability objectives or hinder their realization, depending on how they are applied across countries with varying levels of development. The continuous assessment of the human, social, cultural, economic and environmental impact of AI technologies should therefore be carried out with full cognizance of the implications of AI technologies for sustainability as a set of constantly evolving goals across a range of dimensions, such as currently identified in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations. 
+
+### **Right to Privacy, and Data Protection** 
+
+32. Privacy, a right essential to the protection of human dignity, human autonomy and human agency, must be respected, protected and promoted throughout the life cycle of AI systems. It is important that data for AI systems be collected, used, shared, archived and deleted in ways that are consistent with international law and in line with the values and principles set forth in this Recommendation, while respecting relevant national, regional and international legal frameworks. 
+
+33. Adequate data protection frameworks and governance mechanisms should be established in a multi-stakeholder approach at the national or international level, protected by judicial systems, and ensured throughout the life cycle of AI systems. Data protection frameworks and any related mechanisms should take reference from international data protection principles and standards concerning the collection, use and disclosure of personal data and exercise of their rights by data subjects while ensuring a legitimate aim and a valid legal basis for the processing of personal data, including informed consent. 
+
+34. Algorithmic systems require adequate privacy impact assessments, which also include societal and ethical considerations of their use and an innovative use of the privacy by design approach. AI actors need to ensure that they are accountable for the design and implementation of AI systems in such a way as to ensure that personal information is protected throughout the life cycle of the AI system. 
+
+### **Human oversight and determination** 
+
+35. Member States should ensure that it is always possible to attribute ethical and legal responsibility for any stage of the life cycle of AI systems, as well as in cases of remedy related to AI systems, to physical persons or to existing legal entities. Human oversight refers thus not only to individual human oversight, but to inclusive public oversight, as appropriate. 
+
+36. It may be the case that sometimes humans would choose to rely on AI systems for reasons of efficacy, but the decision to cede control in limited contexts remains that of humans, as humans can resort to AI systems in decision-making and acting, but an AI system can never replace ultimate human responsibility and accountability. As a rule, life and death decisions should not be ceded to AI systems. 
+
+### **Transparency and explainability** 
+
+37. The transparency and explainability of AI systems are often essential preconditions to ensure the respect, protection and promotion of human rights, fundamental freedoms and ethical principles. Transparency is necessary for relevant national and international liability regimes to work effectively. A lack of transparency could also undermine the possibility of effectively challenging decisions based on outcomes produced by AI systems and may thereby infringe the right to a fair trial and effective remedy, and limits the areas in which these systems can be legally used. 
+
+38. While efforts need to be made to increase transparency and explainability of AI systems, including those with extra-territorial impact, throughout their life cycle to support democratic governance, the level of transparency and explainability should always be appropriate to the context and impact, as there may be a need to balance between transparency and explainability and other principles such as privacy, safety and security. People should be fully informed when a decision is informed by or is made on the basis of AI algorithms, including when it affects their safety or human rights, and in those circumstances should have the opportunity to request explanatory information from the relevant AI actor or public sector institutions. In addition, individuals should be able to access the reasons for a decision affecting their rights and freedoms, and have the option of making submissions to a designated staff member of the private sector company or public sector institution able to review and correct the decision. AI actors should inform users when a product or service is provided directly or with the assistance of AI systems in a proper and timely manner. 
+
+39. From a socio-technical lens, greater transparency contributes to more peaceful, just, democratic and inclusive societies. It allows for public scrutiny that can decrease corruption and discrimination, and can also help detect and prevent negative impacts on human rights. Transparency aims at providing appropriate information to the respective addressees to enable their understanding and foster trust. Specific to the AI system, transparency can enable people to understand how each stage of an AI system is put in place, appropriate to the context and sensitivity of the AI system. It may also include insight into factors that affect a specific prediction or decision, and whether or not appropriate assurances (such as safety or fairness measures) are in place. In cases of serious threats of adverse human rights impacts, transparency may also require the sharing of code or datasets. 
+
+40. Explainability refers to making intelligible and providing insight into the outcome of AI systems. The explainability of AI systems also refers to the understandability of the input, output and the functioning of each algorithmic building block and how it contributes to the outcome of the systems. Thus, explainability is closely related to transparency, as outcomes and sub-processes leading to outcomes should aim to be understandable and traceable, appropriate to the context. AI actors should commit to ensuring that the algorithms developed are explainable. In the case of AI applications that impact the end user in a way that is not temporary, easily reversible or otherwise low risk, it should be ensured that the meaningful explanation is provided with any decision that resulted in the action taken in order for the outcome to be considered transparent. 
+
+41. Transparency and explainability relate closely to adequate responsibility and accountability measures, as well as to the trustworthiness of AI systems. 
+
+### **Responsibility and accountability** 
+
+42. AI actors and Member States should respect, protect and promote human rights and fundamental freedoms, and should also promote the protection of the environment and ecosystems, assuming their respective ethical and legal responsibility, in accordance with national and international law, in particular Member States’ human rights obligations, and ethical guidance throughout the life cycle of AI systems, including with respect to AI actors within their effective territory and control. The ethical responsibility and liability for the decisions and actions based in any way on an AI system should always ultimately be attributable to AI actors corresponding to their role in the life cycle of the AI system. 
+
+43. Appropriate oversight, impact assessment, audit and due diligence mechanisms, including whistle-blowers’ protection, should be developed to ensure accountability for AI systems and their impact throughout their life cycle. Both technical and institutional designs should ensure auditability and traceability of (the working of) AI systems in particular to address any conflicts with human rights norms and standards and threats to environmental and ecosystem well-being. 
+
+### **Awareness and literacy** 
+
+44. Public awareness and understanding of AI technologies and the value of data should be promoted through open and accessible education, civic engagement, digital skills and AI ethics training, media and information literacy and training led jointly by governments, intergovernmental organizations, civil society, academia, the media, community leaders and the private sector, and considering the existing linguistic, social and cultural diversity, to ensure effective public participation so that all members of society can take informed decisions about their use of AI systems and be protected from undue influence. 
+
+45. Learning about the impact of AI systems should include learning about, through and for human rights and fundamental freedoms, meaning that the approach and understanding of AI systems should be grounded by their impact on human rights and access to rights, as well as on the environment and ecosystems. 
+
+### **Multi-stakeholder and adaptive governance and collaboration** 
+
+46. International law and national sovereignty must be respected in the use of data. That means that States, complying with international law, can regulate the data generated within or passing through their territories, and take measures towards effective regulation of data, including data protection, based on respect for the right to privacy in accordance with international law and other human rights norms and standards. 
+
+47. Participation of different stakeholders throughout the AI system life cycle is necessary for inclusive approaches to AI governance, enabling the benefits to be shared by all, and to contribute to sustainable development. Stakeholders include but are not limited to governments, intergovernmental organizations, the technical community, civil society, researchers and academia, media, education, policy-makers, private sector companies, human rights institutions and equality bodies, anti-discrimination monitoring bodies, and groups for youth and children. The adoption of open standards and interoperability to facilitate collaboration should be in place. Measures should be adopted to take into account shifts in technologies, the emergence of new groups of stakeholders, and to allow for meaningful participation by marginalized groups, communities and individuals and, where relevant, in the case of Indigenous Peoples, respect for the self-governance of their data. 
+
+## **IV. AREAS OF POLICY ACTION** 
+
+48. The policy actions described in the following policy areas operationalize the values and principles set out in this Recommendation. The main action is for Member States to put in place effective measures, including, for example, policy frameworks or mechanisms, and to ensure that other stakeholders, such as private sector companies, academic and research institutions, and civil society adhere to them by, among other actions, encouraging all stakeholders to develop human rights, rule of law, democracy, and ethical impact assessment and due diligence tools in line with guidance including the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The process for developing such policies or mechanisms should be inclusive of all stakeholders and should take into account the circumstances and priorities of each Member State. UNESCO can be a partner and support Member States in the development as well as monitoring and evaluation of policy mechanisms. 
+
+49. UNESCO recognizes that Member States will be at different stages of readiness to implement this Recommendation, in terms of scientific, technological, economic, educational, legal, regulatory, infrastructural, societal, cultural and other dimensions. It is noted that “readiness” here is a dynamic status. In order to enable the effective implementation of this Recommendation, UNESCO will therefore: (1) develop a readiness assessment methodology to assist interested Member States in identifying their status at specific moments of their readiness trajectory along a continuum of dimensions; and (2) ensure support for interested Member States in terms of developing a UNESCO methodology for Ethical Impact Assessment (EIA) of AI technologies, sharing of best practices, assessment guidelines and other mechanisms and analytical work. 
+
+### **POLICY AREA 1: ETHICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT** 
+
+50. Member States should introduce frameworks for impact assessments, such as ethical impact assessment, to identify and assess benefits, concerns and risks of AI systems, as well as appropriate risk prevention, mitigation and monitoring measures, among other assurance mechanisms. Such impact assessments should identify impacts on human rights and fundamental freedoms, in particular but not limited to the rights of marginalized and vulnerable people or people in vulnerable situations, labour rights, the environment and ecosystems and ethical and social implications, and facilitate citizen participation in line with the values and principles set forth in this Recommendation. 
+
+51. Member States and private sector companies should develop due diligence and oversight mechanisms to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address the impact of AI systems on the respect for human rights, rule of law and inclusive societies. Member States should also be able to assess the socio-economic impact of AI systems on poverty and ensure that the gap between people living in wealth and poverty, as well as the digital divide among and within countries, are not increased with the massive adoption of AI technologies at present and in the future. In order to do this, in particular, enforceable transparency protocols should be implemented, corresponding to the access to information, including information of public interest held by private entities. Member States, private sector companies and civil society should investigate the sociological and psychological effects of AI-based recommendations on humans in their decision-making autonomy. AI systems identified as potential risks to human rights should be broadly tested by AI actors, including in real-world conditions if needed, as part of the Ethical Impact Assessment, before releasing them in the market. 
+
+52. Member States and business enterprises should implement appropriate measures to monitor all phases of an AI system life cycle, including the functioning of algorithms used for decision-making, the data, as well as AI actors involved in the process, especially in public services and where direct end-user interaction is needed, as part of ethical impact assessment. Member States’ human rights law obligations should form part of the ethical aspects of AI system assessments. 
+
+53. Governments should adopt a regulatory framework that sets out a procedure, particularly for public authorities, to carry out ethical impact assessments on AI systems to predict consequences, mitigate risks, avoid harmful consequences, facilitate citizen participation and address societal challenges. The assessment should also establish appropriate oversight mechanisms, including auditability, traceability and explainability, which enable the assessment of algorithms, data and design processes, as well as include external review of AI systems. Ethical impact assessments should be transparent and open to the public, where appropriate. Such assessments should also be multidisciplinary, multistakeholder, multicultural, pluralistic and inclusive. The public authorities should be required to monitor the AI systems implemented and/or deployed by those authorities by introducing appropriate mechanisms and tools. 
+
+### **POLICY AREA 2: ETHICAL GOVERNANCE AND STEWARDSHIP** 
+
+54. Member States should ensure that AI governance mechanisms are inclusive, transparent, multidisciplinary, multilateral (this includes the possibility of mitigation and redress of harm across borders) and multi-stakeholder. In particular, governance should include aspects of anticipation, and effective protection, monitoring of impact, enforcement and redress. 
+
+55. Member States should ensure that harms caused through AI systems are investigated and redressed, by enacting strong enforcement ... (50 KB left)

package/rules/general/UN_Human_Rights.md

@@ -0,0 +1,183 @@
+# Universal Declaration of Human Rights 
+
+## Preamble 
+
+Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world, 
+
+Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people, 
+
+Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law, 
+
+Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations, 
+
+Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom, 
+
+Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in cooperation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms, 
+
+Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge, 
+
+Now, therefore, 
+
+The General Assembly, 
+
+Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by 
+
+teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction. 
+
+## Article I 
+
+All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. 
+
+## Article 2 
+
+Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. 
+
+## Article 3 
+
+Everyone has the right to life, liberty and the security of person. 
+
+## Article 4 
+
+No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms. 
+
+## Article 5 
+
+No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. 
+
+## Article 6 
+
+Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. 
+
+## Article 7 
+
+All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination. 
+
+## Article 8 
+
+Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law. 
+
+## Article 9 
+
+No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile. 
+
+## Article 10 
+
+Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him. 
+
+## Article 11 
+
+1. Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence. 
+
+2. No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed. 
+
+## Article 12 
+
+No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. 
+
+## Article 13 
+
+1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State. 
+
+2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country. 
+
+## Article 14 
+
+1. Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. 
+
+2. This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. 
+
+## Article 15 
+
+1. Everyone has the right to a nationality. 
+
+2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality. 
+
+## Article 16 
+
+1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. 
+
+2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses. 
+
+3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State. 
+
+## Article 17 
+
+1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. 
+
+2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property. 
+
+## Article 18 
+
+Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance. 
+
+## Article 19 
+
+Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. 
+
+## Article 20 
+
+1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. 
+
+2. No one may be compelled to belong to an association. 
+
+## Article 21 
+
+1. Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives. 
+
+2. Everyone has the right to equal access to public service in his country. 
+
+3. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures. 
+
+## Article 22 
+
+Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality. 
+
+## Article 23 
+
+1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment. 
+
+2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work. 
+
+3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection. 
+
+4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests. 
+
+## Article 24 
+
+Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay. 
+
+## Article 25 
+
+1. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. 
+
+2. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection. 
+
+## Article 26 
+
+1. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit. 
+
+2. Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace. 
+
+3. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children. 
+
+## Article 27 
+
+1. Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits. 
+
+2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author. 
+
+## Article 28 
+
+Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized. 
+
+## Article 29 
+
+1. Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible. 
+
+2. In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society. 
+
+3. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. 
+
+## Article 30 
+
+Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein. 

package/rules/index.json

@@ -0,0 +1,145 @@
+{
+  "_comment": "Semantic policy index. Maps domain concepts to policy files and proxy attribute lists. Used by startup.py. NOT a grep index — keywords are concept anchors, proxies are documented in the literature.",
+
+  "criminal_justice": {
+    "files": ["EU_AI_Act_Annex_III", "UN_Human_Rights", "UNESCO_AI_Ethics"],
+    "annex": "Annex III.6.d",
+    "keywords": [
+      "recidivism", "criminal", "parole", "sentencing", "compas",
+      "reoffend", "bail", "arrest", "two_year_recid", "risk score",
+      "reoffending", "pretrial", "probation", "incarceration"
+    ],
+    "proxies": [
+      "zip_code", "prior_arrests", "priors_count", "juv_fel_count",
+      "juv_misd_count", "family_history", "neighborhood_crime_rate",
+      "school_district", "census_tract"
+    ],
+    "udhr_articles": ["Article 7", "Article 10", "Article 11"],
+    "case_references": [
+      "ProPublica COMPAS analysis (2016)",
+      "State v. Loomis (2016) — due process in algorithmic sentencing",
+      "Chouldechova (2016) — Fair Prediction with Disparate Impact"
+    ],
+    "fairness_impossibility": true
+  },
+
+  "employment": {
+    "files": ["EU_AI_Act_Annex_III", "UN_Human_Rights", "UNESCO_AI_Ethics", "OECD_Principles"],
+    "annex": "Annex III.4.a",
+    "keywords": [
+      "job", "recruitment", "hiring", "resume", "cv", "employment",
+      "advertisement", "candidate", "fairjob", "job ad", "click",
+      "click-through", "ctr", "talent", "applicant", "interview"
+    ],
+    "proxies": [
+      "browsing_history", "page_likes", "purchase_history",
+      "maternity", "paternity", "childcare", "toy_preferences",
+      "graduation_year", "school_name", "employment_gap",
+      "college_name", "sorority", "fraternity"
+    ],
+    "udhr_articles": ["Article 23"],
+    "case_references": [
+      "Datta et al. (2015) — Google ad delivery gender bias audit",
+      "Ali et al. (2019) — Facebook ad discrimination audit",
+      "Lambrecht & Tucker (2019) — STEM ad gender disparity across 191 countries",
+      "Amazon AI recruiting tool scrapped for bias (2018)"
+    ],
+    "fairness_impossibility": true
+  },
+
+  "credit_scoring": {
+    "files": ["EU_AI_Act_Annex_III", "UN_Human_Rights", "UNESCO_AI_Ethics"],
+    "annex": "Annex III.5.b",
+    "keywords": [
+      "credit", "loan", "default", "creditworthiness", "mortgage",
+      "financial risk", "lending", "apple card", "credit card",
+      "credit limit", "credit score", "debt", "repayment",
+      "two_year_recid", "yeh", "credit card clients"
+    ],
+    "proxies": [
+      "zip_code", "education_level", "school_name", "employment_gap",
+      "credit_history_length", "bank_type", "car_ownership",
+      "income_bracket", "neighborhood"
+    ],
+    "udhr_articles": ["Article 22"],
+    "case_references": [
+      "Apple Card / Goldman Sachs NYDFS investigation (2019–2021)",
+      "Shapiro, Northwestern (2019) — creditworthiness vs gender impossibility"
+    ],
+    "fairness_impossibility": true
+  },
+
+  "children_safety": {
+    "files": ["UN_Human_Rights", "UNESCO_AI_Ethics"],
+    "annex": "Annex III (context-dependent)",
+    "keywords": [
+      "child", "minor", "children", "safeguarding", "grooming",
+      "bullying", "moderation", "self-harm", "abuse", "distress",
+      "escalation", "chat safety", "under 18", "youth", "student"
+    ],
+    "proxies": [],
+    "udhr_articles": [
+      "UN CRC Article 3", "UN CRC Article 12",
+      "UN CRC Article 16", "UN CRC Article 19", "UN CRC Article 34"
+    ],
+    "case_references": [
+      "UNICEF Guidance on AI and Children v3.0 (2025)",
+      "UNICEF When AI becomes a friend (2026)"
+    ],
+    "fairness_impossibility": false,
+    "special_requirements": [
+      "escalation_policy_required",
+      "data_retention_limit_required",
+      "false_negative_tolerance_documented"
+    ]
+  },
+
+  "race_discrimination": {
+    "files": ["EU_AI_Act_Annex_III", "UN_Human_Rights", "UNESCO_AI_Ethics"],
+    "annex": null,
+    "keywords": [
+      "race", "ethnicity", "racial", "national origin", "skin color",
+      "minority", "ethnic group"
+    ],
+    "proxies": [
+      "zip_code", "surname", "neighborhood", "school_district",
+      "census_tract", "bank_branch", "grocery_store_distance",
+      "church_attendance", "prior_arrests"
+    ],
+    "udhr_articles": ["Article 2", "Article 7"],
+    "case_references": [
+      "ProPublica COMPAS (2016)", "Ali et al. Facebook audit (2019)"
+    ],
+    "fairness_impossibility": true
+  },
+
+  "gender_discrimination": {
+    "files": ["EU_AI_Act_Annex_III", "UN_Human_Rights", "UNESCO_AI_Ethics"],
+    "annex": null,
+    "keywords": [
+      "gender", "sex", "women", "men", "female", "male",
+      "gender gap", "gender bias", "pay gap"
+    ],
+    "proxies": [
+      "browsing_history", "page_likes", "purchase_history",
+      "maternity", "paternity", "childcare", "cosmetics",
+      "sports_interest", "toy_preferences"
+    ],
+    "udhr_articles": ["Article 2", "Article 23"],
+    "case_references": [
+      "Amazon recruiting tool (2018)", "Lambrecht & Tucker STEM ads (2019)",
+      "Apple Card / Goldman Sachs NYDFS (2021)"
+    ],
+    "fairness_impossibility": true
+  },
+
+  "general": {
+    "files": ["UN_Human_Rights", "UNESCO_AI_Ethics", "OECD_Principles"],
+    "annex": null,
+    "keywords": [],
+    "proxies": [],
+    "udhr_articles": ["Article 2", "Article 7"],
+    "case_references": [],
+    "fairness_impossibility": false
+  }
+}