Global Digital Justice Forum urges rights-based, independent and inclusive design for UN AI scientific panel
Members of the Global Digital Justice Forum have submitted a joint response to the UN survey on the terms of reference for the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI and the Global Dialogue on AI Governance. They call for transparent and independent governance structures, exclusion of industry-backed actors, strong human-rights foundations and coordinated, evidence-based global policymaking that avoids symbolic advisory bodies and delivers enforceable accountability.
Several members of the Global Digital Justice Forum – including IT for Change, APC, Global Partners Digital, Derechos Digitales and Media Monitoring Africa – have issued a joint submission to the United Nations survey on the establishment of the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI and the Global Dialogue on AI Governance. The submission is grounded in the premise that AI systems are inseparable from prevailing power structures, global economic models, labour relations and geopolitical competition. As such, any UN-led structure must be designed to confront, rather than obscure, these realities.
The submission sets out detailed recommendations for the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI, emphasising that its mandate should be firmly centred on evidence-based research and global public interest policymaking. The forum argues that the panel must systematically analyse the societal impacts of AI across human rights, economic inequality, political processes, environmental degradation and labour markets. Its work should reflect regional asymmetries in resources and technological capabilities, while addressing differentiated harms experienced by Indigenous peoples and other marginalised groups. The panel, they argue, should play a defining role in developing coherent global standards for AI risk assessment and regulation.
To preserve the independence and legitimacy of this new scientific body, the submission calls for strict conflict-of-interest rules, full transparency and strong safeguards against corporate influence. It recommends that industry-backed actors be excluded from membership while allowing for consultation with the private sector under clearly delineated terms. The funding model should prevent donors from shaping the panel’s agenda while ensuring equitable participation from under-resourced regions.
Turning to the Global Dialogue on AI Governance, the forum advises that it should not be a standalone process but embedded within or closely linked to established global digital-governance mechanisms such as the WSIS process, the Internet Governance Forum and relevant human-rights, labour and environmental frameworks. The dialogue must be interdisciplinary by design and grounded in international human rights law, WSIS principles and the Global Digital Compact to ensure that AI development benefits people equitably and does not exacerbate existing global divides.
The submission also details how the two bodies should interact: institutionally independent but strategically connected. The Scientific Panel should provide rigorous analysis to guide discussions, while the Dialogue Panel should translate findings into coordinated policymaking and global consensus-building. Both must work together to strengthen coherence across AI governance efforts and avoid duplication.
Finally, the forum warns that neither body should become a superficial advisory mechanism used to delay regulation. They argue that AI governance must include strong compliance mechanisms so that expert recommendations lead to enforceable obligations, meaningful transparency and real accountability across public and private actors. Members of the Global Digital Justice Forum conclude by restating their commitment to shaping AI governance structures that are democratic, rights-based and responsive to diverse global realities.
