Engage all stakeholders in formulating national policy on AI: TIB, Article 19

Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) and international human rights organisation Article 19 advocated for the engagement of all stakeholders, including civil rights organisations, throughout the process of formulating a national policy on Artificial Intelligence (AI).

In a joint statement issued today (3 April), the two organisations have raised concerns about the lack of involvement of civil society organisations in the early stages of drafting and reviewing a policy that has far-reaching impacts on every citizen of the country.

"The AI policy has been drafted mainly keeping in mind the experiences of other countries in the field of AI. While emphasising aspects such as government services, governance, judicial systems, telecommunications, data governance, and surveillance in the context of Bangladesh, there is a notable lack of clear discussion regarding the multifaceted impact of this policy on the country's citizens," reads the statement. 

The drafting process regrettably overlooked the involvement of any individual or organisation working on civil rights, it said.

While Article 3.6 of the draft principles commendably mentions the importance of the rule of law and human rights, TIB and Article Nineteen voiced apprehension over the lack of emphasis on these crucial issues regarding priority areas, implementation methods, and challenges addressed in the policy. 

Mentioning the draft National Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy 2024, the two organisations stated that an independent National Artificial Intelligence Center will be established with relevant departments and agencies. 

"There is a provision for the formation of the National AI Advisory Council. However, nearly all members of this council, including the advisor and chairman, represent various government agencies, Therefore, concerns arise regarding the independence of this council," said the statement. 

Additionally, TIB and Article 19 said there is a concern that the government's implementation of a policy may imply surveillance of its citizens, constituting a clear violation of human rights. 

They urged the authorities concerned that the draft must prioritise upholding the rule of law and human rights, diverging from surveillance-oriented trends.