Line 1. Artificial intelligence and procedural guarantees in the Rule of Law
The incorporation of artificial intelligence systems into the administration of justice raises significant challenges for procedural guarantees and the effective protection of human rights. Tools supporting judicial decision-making, predictive systems, or algorithms used in case management can improve the efficiency of the system, but they also raise questions about transparency, explainability, and judicial oversight. In particular, there is a need to examine how classical principles of procedural law—such as effective judicial protection, equality of arms, the right to defense, or the reasoning of judicial decisions—must be reinterpreted in light of decisions assisted or influenced by algorithms. This line of discussion seeks to analyze what normative standards and oversight mechanisms are being developed, and should be developed in the future, to ensure that artificial intelligence is used as a support tool without compromising the fundamental guarantees of due process.
Line 2. Neurorights, neurotechnological evidence, and protection of the mental sphere in judicial proceedings
The advance of neurotechnologies introduces a new dimension in the relationship between science, judicial process and fundamental rights. The possibility of accessing, recording or interpreting neural data raises unprecedented questions about mental privacy, cognitive autonomy and the psychic integrity of individuals. In the procedural sphere, these developments give rise to debates over the admissibility of neurotechnological evidence, the limits on obtaining brain data, and the guarantees necessary to prevent forms of cognitive coercion. This line proposes to examine how so-called neurorights can be integrated into the human rights framework and what implications they have for the future configuration of procedural guarantees.
