UN urges safeguards against misuse of neurotechnology in criminal justice
A UN report warns that neurotechnology, particularly when combined with artificial intelligence, could threaten mental privacy, freedom of thought and fair-trial rights if neural data are used in criminal investigations or court proceedings without adequate safeguards. The Secretary-General calls for stronger legal and ethical protections, including bans on coercive and abusive applications.
The United Nations is calling for stronger safeguards as technologies capable of measuring and analysing brain activity become increasingly accessible beyond medical and research settings. In a report presented to the UN General Assembly in October 2026, the Secretary-General warned that the use of neurotechnology in criminal justice could challenge fundamental rights and existing legal protections.
The concern centres on neural data: information collected through devices that measure or interact with the nervous system. These include electroencephalography (EEG) devices, neural implants and brain-computer interfaces. While such technologies can support neurological treatment, rehabilitation and communication for people with disabilities, their expanding use in consumer products raises questions about how information collected for one purpose might later be used in investigations or legal proceedings.
The combination of neurotechnology and AI adds another layer of complexity. Systems can analyse neural signals to infer patterns associated with attention, emotional responses or cognitive activity. However, these inferences are not direct readings of a person’s thoughts or intentions, nor do they establish whether someone is telling the truth. Treating them as conclusive evidence could lead authorities to draw conclusions that the underlying data cannot reliably support.
The potential consequences extend beyond privacy. In criminal proceedings, the collection or use of neural data could raise questions about the presumption of innocence, the right not to incriminate oneself and the ability of defendants to challenge evidence presented against them. Questions also arise over consent, access to sensitive data and the scientific reliability of AI-generated interpretations.
The Secretary-General’s report calls for stronger legal and ethical safeguards, including prohibitions on coercive and abusive uses of neurotechnology. Its concerns reflect a wider governance challenge: ensuring that advances in neuroscience and AI do not outpace protections for individual autonomy and fundamental rights.
International policy work is also examining how neural information is handled throughout its lifecycle. An OECD publication released on 6 October 2026, Neurodata Governance: Evidence from Innovators for Public Policy, examines the collection, processing, transfer and reuse of neural data across clinical, research and consumer settings. It identifies fragmented regulatory approaches and uncertainty over responsibilities, pointing to the need for clearer rules, proportionate safeguards and international cooperation.
As neurotechnology becomes more widely available, policymakers face the task of distinguishing beneficial applications from uses that could undermine fundamental rights. In criminal justice, this requires particular attention to the reliability of scientific evidence, the conditions under which neural data may be obtained and used, and whether individuals have a meaningful opportunity to contest interpretations of their brain activity.
The UN report is available through the UN General Assembly document repository.
