On December 10, 2023, the academic seminar on Human Rights Protection in the Digital Era was held in Nanjing under the guidance of the China Society for Human Rights Studies, hosted by the Institute for Human Rights Studies of Southeast University, and co-organized by the Judicial Big Data Research Base of the People's Courts of Southeast University, the Civil Prosecution Research Center of Southeast University, and the Center for the Rule of Law on Cybersecurity of Southeast University. The conference not only invited the Central Propaganda Department to attend.
The conference not only invited relevant leaders from the Human Rights Bureau of the Central Propaganda Department and the China Society for Human Rights Studies to visit and guide the conference, but also attracted a large number of participants from Jilin University, Fudan University, Wuhan University, Nanjing University, Central South University, Southeast University, Nankai University, Xiamen University, Soochow University, Beijing University of Science and Technology, Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, South China University of Science and Technology, East China University of Politics and Law, Northwest University of Politics and Law, Guangxi University, Guangzhou University, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangdong University of Finance and Economics, and Guangdong University of Technology. Experts and scholars from major universities and research institutions in and outside the province, such as Guangdong University of Technology and Guangdong University of Finance and Economics, as well as editors and reviewers from core journals, such as Nanjing Social Sciences, Jiangsu Higher Education, Educational Management in Colleges and Universities, Journal of Educational Science of Hunan Normal University, and Learning and Practice, attended the event together with more than 200 people.
The opening ceremony of the conference was presided over by Prof. Ouyang Benqi, Dean of the Law School of Southeast University. Xing Jihong, Deputy Secretary of the Party Committee of Southeast University, and Lu Guangjin, Vice President of the China Society for Human Rights Studies and Professor of the Law School of Jilin University, delivered speeches respectively.
Xing Jihong, Deputy Secretary of the Party Committee of Southeast University, firstly expressed his gratitude to all the guests attending this meeting. Then, Mr. Xing emphasized that the 20th Party Congress Report put forward the task of building a digital China, so how to assess and solve the various impacts of digital technologies such as the digital divide on the cause of human rights protection, and accelerate the construction of a Chinese picture of digital human rights has become the most important issue nowadays. Therefore, how to assess and solve the various impacts of digital technology on the cause of human rights protection, such as the digital divide, and how to speed up the construction of a Chinese picture of digital human rights has become a very important and urgent task of the times. Secretary Xing went on to point out that China not only advocates the building of a community of human destiny internationally, but also promotes the realization of the goal of common prosperity for all domestically, which requires that the path of human rights protection in the digital era must be in line with the Chinese-style modernization. This requires that the path of human rights protection in the digital age must be compatible with the path of Chinese-style modernization, so as to contribute Chinese wisdom and strength to the global human rights cause. Mr. Xing also briefly introduced the historical origin, development history and achievements of Southeast University and Southeast University Human Rights Research Institute. Finally, Mr. Xing once again extended his sincere greetings to all the participating leaders and experts, and wished the conference a complete success!
Prof. Lu Guangjin, Vice President of the China Society for Human Rights Studies, delivered a speech entitled Digital Technology and the Promotion of Free and Comprehensive Development of Human Beings. Starting from the Marxist theory of realizing the free and comprehensive development of human beings, Prof. Lu discussed that scientific and technological progress is a necessary condition to promote the realization of free and comprehensive development of human beings. In particular, President Lu pointed out that the rise of digital technology with generative artificial intelligence represents the gradual transition of artificial intelligence from the era of perceptual intelligence to the era of cognitive intelligence, which is driving subversive changes in the mode of production, organization, and relations of production of the human society, and creating a lot of possible conditions for the diversified development of human beings. Later, President Lu put forward four positive impacts of digital technology empowering human beings from the aspect of positive human rights, which include the expansion of human living space, the enrichment and optimization of human lifestyles, the innovation and emancipation of human labor, and the general increase of human sharing opportunities. However, Mr. Lu also pointed out that we should pay special attention to the negative impacts of digital technology on human existence and development, including the lack of provisions on data rights and protection, and the frequent infringement of personal rights by cyber violence. Therefore, strengthening data legislation, data security management and data ethics is of particular significance in promoting the free and comprehensive development of human beings in the digital age. Finally, President Lu expressed his own thoughts on digital technology by quoting a passage from Yuval Hraley's A Brief History of the Future: sharing together may be the greatest happiness that digital technology brings to each of us, which may be the proper meaning of realizing free and comprehensive human development.
On the sidelines of the conference, Prof. Gong Xianghe, Executive Director of Human Rights Research Institute of Southeast University, was interviewed by China International Television, China News Network and other media. According to Prof. Gong, the deep integration of digital science and technology represented by the Internet, big data, and artificial intelligence with people's life and production marks our entry into the digital era. However, while digital technology brings convenience to human production and lifestyle, the rights enjoyed by people are also being challenged. Professor Gong said that in the digital era, the right to freedom of expression, the right to privacy, the right to reputation, etc., all show a different pattern from the traditional physical space, for example, the right to reputation can be quantified as retweeted 500 times cumulative amount of crime standard. He also pointed out that, in accordance with the principle of human-centeredness, it is necessary to strengthen digital human rights legislation, law revision and law interpretation, so as to guarantee the realization of digital human rights. In particular, digital human rights legislation in all fields should be further strengthened in accordance with the Constitution to guarantee the full realization of digital human rights.
The keynote speech session was co-chaired by Prof. Gong Xianghe, Executive Director of the Human Rights Research Institute of Southeast University, and Prof. Peng Zhongli, Vice Dean of the Law School of Central South University.
Professor Chang Jian, Director of Nankai University's Human Rights Research Center and Zhou Enlai School of Government and Management, gave a presentation entitled The Crisis of Subjectivity in the Digital Age and the Types of Human Rights Norms to be Applied. Prof. Chang began with a central question: do the challenges to human rights in the digital age match the existing norms of human rights protection? Professor Chang continued to ask whether traditional human rights theory, which was born in the era of industrialization, can be applied to the digital era, or whether the digital era is beyond the scope of adjustment of existing human rights theories and norms. According to Prof. Chang, traditional human rights theories and norms were born under specific historical and social conditions, and were the product of the dual influence of the industrialization process and the market economy.The core theory of traditional human rights is to recognize and safeguard the subjectivity of human beings, which is specifically manifested in independent and autonomous choice and free practical will. Professor Chang summarizes four crises of human subjectivity in the digital age: the erosion of subjective space (e.g., the violation of the right to personal information), the sharing of subjective resources (e.g., the rise of the sharing economy), and the reconstruction of the right to make autonomous choices (e.g., the screening and recommendation of information by big data algorithms). At the same time, Prof. Chang also combed through the four countermeasures discussed in the academia and put forward his own doubts: first, technological countermeasures, but new control technologies will instead generate new risks; second, judicial countermeasures, but the digital era prefers legislative countermeasures to judicial; third, citizen participation, but it is likely that the more citizens participate, the more they will be under control; and fourth, the addition of rights, but the basis of the subjectivity of the added rights is not clear.
Prof. Liu Zhiqiang, Distinguished Professor of Guangzhou Scholars and Professor of Human Rights Research Institute of Guangzhou University, made a presentation entitled Patterns of Human Rights Research Status in the Digital Age. Prof. Liu discussed the three modes of human rights research in the digital era, logical divergence and normative integration respectively. According to him, the three modes include synthetic mode, coordinated mode and integrated mode respectively; the logical difference mainly lies in whether the historical and substantive logic from digital power to digital human rights can be compatible with the historical and substantive logic from human rights to human rights. The main difference in logic lies in whether the historical and substantive logic from digital power to digital human rights can be integrated with the normative and formal logic from human rights to digitalization of human rights; while the normative integration should be centered on the principles of clarity of subject, clarity of obligation and transformation of form. Normative integration should be discussed mainly around the four aspects of clarity of subject, clarity of obligation, transformation of form and effective guarantee. Finally, Prof. Liu believes that in the digital era, human rights are facing the structural domination of the digitalization of power, and the overall structure of human rights governance presents internal unity and external complementarity, and in this context, the inter-system connection provides an ideal model for the evolution of human rights governance in the digital era.
Prof. Yang Chengming, Dean of the School of Civil and Commercial Law of Zhuhai College of Beijing Institute of Technology, made a presentation entitled Ruminations on the Intergenerationalization of Digital Human Rights. Prof. Yang first raised the core question of the report: whether digital human rights can be the new generation of human rights. Then, Prof. Yang elaborated the evolutionary history of intergenerational human rights in terms of productivity and production relations respectively. Finally, Professor Yang focuses on the process and ways of confirming intergenerational human rights in terms of the succession and generalization of human rights iteration, the fourth generation of human rights in terms of jurisprudence, domestic law, international law, and international authoritative political organizations.
Associate Professor Han Xuji, Deputy Director of the Digital Rule of Law Institute of East China University of Political Science and Law, gave a presentation entitled Practical Changes and Theoretical Expansion of Digital Human Rights. Mr. Han firstly pointed out three kinds of human rights crises in digital society: the institutional challenges of digital social transformation, the exclusion effect of digital divide and the coercive power of digital society. Mr. Han then introduced the official recognition of digital human rights at home and abroad: the official terminology at the domestic level has gone through a shift from cyber human rights to digital human rights, while at the international level it has gone through a shift from the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) to the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), to the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). At the domestic level, the official terminology has changed from cyber human rights to digital human rights, while at the international level, the terminology has changed from the right to privacy in the digital age in the UN Human Rights Council to digital human rights in the UN General Assembly for the first time. Mr. Han then focuses on the content of digital human rights and its significance for China, summarizes the views of digital human rights naysayers, and tries to respond to some of them. Finally, Mr. Han discussed the constitutional protection mechanism of digital human rights from three aspects: the right to inclusion of the useless class, the right to self-determination of digital citizens, and the horizontal effect of fundamental rights.
Professor Liu Pu of the Human Rights Research Center of Northwestern University of Political Science and Law made a report entitled Transformation of the right to education system and the value orientation of education legislation in the era of intelligent education. She pointed out that a new pattern of global education development is being formed with intelligent education as a distinctive feature, and in this context, the fair and high-quality requirements of the right to education have become more prominent, and the system of rights has increased the contents of the right to access to digital education, the right to conditions for the cultivation of digital literacy, and so on. The rights system has also increased the content of the right to access digital education and the right to conditions for digital literacy development. Therefore, education legislation in the era of intelligent education pursues the balance of quality education, lifelong education for all and the protection of the rights of vulnerable groups, while the freedom of education tends to be the freedom of learning, the freedom of teaching, and the freedom of choice of education.
Prof. Guan Hua of Guangxi University Law School made a report entitled Prospect of Education Legislation in the Age of Intelligence. Prof. Guan Hua pointed out that the development history of artificial intelligence can be roughly divided into three stages: specialized artificial intelligence, general artificial intelligence and super artificial intelligence. While AI brings many opportunities to education, it also brings challenges such as privacy leakage, digital divide, artificial number service, and alienation of education. In the age of intelligence, the legal relationship of education should maintain its traditional core content, but also have corresponding changes. Based on the relevant analysis, Prof. Guan Hua proposed a package of amendments to integrate the legislation on smart education into the education code.
In the talk session, Prof. Shangguan Piliang, Associate Dean of Wang Jian Law School of Soochow University, was the first to speak. On the basis of fully affirming the first two reports, Prof. Shangguan put forward his own views on digital human rights: the concept of human rights should be redefined at the legal level; the basic concept and essence of digital human rights still need to be further clarified; digital human rights are only a new form of rights, not new rights; digital human rights are not a separate right, but a collective term for related rights in the digital field; digital human rights are not limited to the rights stipulated in the constitution Digital human rights are not limited to the rights stipulated in the constitution and laws, but can be extended outward through the dynamic interpretation of judges.
Qian Jinyu, Executive Deputy Director of the Human Rights and Rule of Law Research Center, a social science research base in Guangdong Province, and Distinguished Professor of Guangdong University of Technology, then made a speech. Prof. Qian pointed out that in the field of academic research, the most cutting-edge issues are the most fundamental ones. The controversy over the various schools of thought on digital human rights has centered on the core elements of human rights, namely the definition of the content of human beings and rights. In the third and fourth reports, the reconciliatory value embedded therein is inclusive of different academic views, and the theoretical modeling of human rights' intergenerational turnover is worth recognizing. The origins of human rights involved, as well as the issue of communitarianism related to the fourth generation of human rights, can be further explored and clarified.
Finally, Prof. Dai Jitao, Executive Director of the Human Rights Research Institute of Guangdong University of Finance and Economics, spoke. Prof. Dai pointed out that the issue of education legislation, which is the focus of the fifth and sixth reports, is a hot topic that has received widespread attention in current practice. The practice of intelligent education in China has been developing rapidly, and the specific issues involved, such as diversified evaluation, moral education and student cultivation, are all worthy of in-depth discussion. As for the realization of the right to success in the process of education, how to treat and deal with the unfair distribution of educational resources in practice should also receive attention.
In the afternoon, the conference began with a thematic discussion session, which consisted of two sessions.
The first session on Basic Theory of Digital Human Rights was co-chaired by Mr. Xiao Disheng, Deputy Editor-in-Chief of Jiangsu Higher Education, and Prof. Wang Jinyuan of Law School of Southeast University.
Associate Professor Tian Fang of the Law School of Nanjing University delivered a report entitled Functions and Limitations of Digital Human Rights in the Context of Data Governance. The report mainly focuses on the actual function of digital human rights in data governance. Starting from the concept of freedom, Prof. Tian first sorted out the history of the development of the concept of human rights, and argued that the significance of human rights does not lie in the identification of certain specific rights, but conveys a belief in the respect for human dignity, which gives the guarantee of rights a universal language. However, with the development of artificial intelligence technology, data has become the most important factor of production, and while guaranteeing the free flow of data globally, the rights of individual data have been safeguarded, and digital human rights have become the common language of data governance. However, digital human rights only focuses on the relationship between data subjects and data processors, while ignoring the social effects of data production and the harm of digital technology itself on people. Therefore, building a harmonious and beautiful digital society is the ultimate goal of digital human rights.
Wu Lan, a doctoral student at the Law School of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, gave a report entitled The Debate on the Semantics of Digital Human Rights. The report is divided into three main parts: the semantics of digital, the meaning of human rights and the possibility of digital human rights. First, she introduced the different semantics of digital human rights to be discussed in this paper from the digital human rights debate. Then, she discusses four different semantic connotations, namely, humanity, space, generation, and object, and intervenes to explore the meaning of human rights in different discourses. Finally, she summarizes several possibilities of the connotation of digital human rights.
Wang Xia, a doctoral student at the Institute of Human Rights of Southeast University, gave a report entitled Jurisprudential Evidence and Content Expression of Digital Human Rights. The report mainly focuses on the definition of the subject of digital human rights, the essence of the original, the content and form, and the subject of the obligation and other aspects of the analysis. The reporter first analyzed the relationship between science and technology and human rights. She argues that the external realization conditions of human rights are not the human rights ontology, and that the moral attributes of human rights are not enough to support the human rights ontology, so the ontology of digital human rights has both natural and social attributes. Specifically, she argues that the subject of digital life is a concrete human being rather than an artificial intelligence or digital human being, and that the content of digital human rights contains the right of access to digital society and the right to self-determination of digital information.
Jin Mengge, a PhD student at Shandong University School of Law (Weihai), gave a presentation titled Digital Identity: The Intersection of Legal and Ethical Issues in Future Human-Computer Interaction. The presenter first explored the conceptual connotation and development trend of digital identity, and then analyzed its power relationship in human-computer interaction, as well as the legal and ethical issues that may arise from it. Finally, she put forward a series of recommendations for future development, including balancing the conflict between authentication and privacy, clarifying that the purpose of technology is to serve human beings, and how to redefine the concept of human being in human-computer interaction.
Dr. Yuan Liu of the Human Rights Research Institute of Wuhan University gave a presentation entitled Theoretical Reflections on the Digital Divide and the Human Rights Turn. According to the speaker, the digital divide is a differentiated phenomenon resulting from the interaction of individuals with the digital environment, and its surface structure must be revealed through the three-level framework of access, use, and benefit, while the digital divide can only be revealed through the three-level framework of access, use, and benefit. Its surface structure had to be revealed through the three-level framework of access, use and benefit, and the impact of the digital divide on the guarantee of human rights in the digital age needed to be analyzed from the perspectives of digital inequality and digital exclusion. He also suggested that theoretical discussions and practical actions on the digital divide must incorporate a human rights-based approach, highlighting the normative standards of human rights and the action logic of empowerment.
Ding Yaqian, a doctoral student at the Law School of Wuhan University, presented a paper entitled New Patterns of Women's Human Rights in the Digital Age. The report is divided into four aspects: new manifestations of women's human rights violations in the digital era, new development of feminist movement in the digital era, new challenges of women's human rights protection in the digital era, and new orientation of women's human rights realization in the digital era. Firstly, she thinks that the new characterization of women's human rights violations is new in terms of field and content; secondly, she elaborates the new development of feminism in terms of new theory and new practice; thirdly, she summarizes the new challenges in three aspects, including new types of violations which are more hidden and difficult to regulate, the ineffectiveness of human rights governance of digital science and technology enterprises, and the misdemeanor of digital feminism that exacerbates the gender antagonism; and lastly, she puts forward the new directions for the realization of women's human rights, including the strengthening of the national human rights protection system, the strengthening of the national human rights protection system and the realization of women's human rights in digital era. Finally, she put forward three new directions for the realization of women's human rights, including strengthening the state's obligation to guarantee human rights, improving the human rights responsibility mechanism of enterprises, and strengthening human rights education on gender equality.
Cao Lijun, a doctoral student at the School of Law of Beijing Institute of Technology, made a presentation entitled Value Turning and Tension Balance: Jurisprudential Response to the Protection of Basic Human Rights in Intelligent Administration. The report mainly analyzes the relationship structure of intelligent administration, the value turn of human rights protection in intelligent administration, and the tension balance between intelligent administration and human rights protection. According to the report, the traditional human rights theory can still be the profound foundation for the existence and development of human rights in intelligent administration, which is specifically manifested in the fact that the traditional human rights protection mechanism has induced the triple value turn of the evidence development, theoretical foundation and legislative model of the human rights protection mechanism in intelligent administration. Therefore, we need to grasp the balance of tension between intelligent administration and human rights protection, and make different legal decisions under different social environment conditions.
Wang Haoran, a doctoral student at the Law School of Nanjing University, made a report titled Jurisprudential Research and Institutional Construction of Punitive Damages for Massive Personal Information Infringement. According to the report, there is a significant imbalance between the interests of the information subject and the information processor in large-scale personal information infringement, but neither the public law path, which is dominated by high fines, nor the traditional private law path, which is dominated by after-the-fact remedies, can effectively regulate it. Therefore, he believes that the construction of punitive damages for large-scale personal information infringement in China should start from the two levels of element control and damage calculation, and finally enhance the reasonableness of punitive damages and the persuasiveness of the results of damage calculation.
In the talk session, Professor Deng Weihui of Law School of Guangxi University for Nationalities pointed out that the first three papers mainly focused on the generation and realization of digital human rights, and discussed more about the ontology of digital human rights. Prof. Deng started from Saussure's linguistic theory of can refer and referent, and clearly put forward that referent is more important than can refer in the conceptual definition of digital human rights. It is more important to refer to than to be able to refer. Then, Prof. Deng believes that the argumentation of digital human rights should focus on both textualism and historicist approach, that is, the argumentation of digital human rights should be based on the context of the times and the academic background of the scholars. Regarding the realization of digital human rights, Prof. Deng argues that we should pay attention to both the subjectivity and the intergenerational nature of human rights. Finally, Prof. Deng pointed out that, in fact, the concept of digital human rights has never gone beyond the theoretical scope of traditional human rights.
Xu Minchuan, a researcher at the Judicial Big Data Research Center of Southeast University, firstly pointed out that the choice of topic for the fourth paper on digital identity is very meaningful, but the article should also answer the question: if our daily life and learning are doomed to not be able to escape from the digitization of human beings, how should the law respond to it. Prof. Xu also pointed out that the question of how law can move towards morality raised at the end of the article is a very valuable question, but it is unrealistic to hope that the law will be embedded in technology, as this is a difficult problem at the practical level. In the seventh paper, Prof. Xu argued that the argumentation on how smart administration should work should be further deepened. For the eighth paper, Prof. Xu argued that the authors should introduce a more important literature on the non-punitive aspects of punitive damages. Professor Xu concluded that the discussion of digital human rights should focus on practicality and further refine the study of the regulation of technology, leading to an operational or quantifiable standard.
Song Fan, a doctoral student at the Human Rights Research Institute of Southeast University, pointed out that the article Theoretical Rethinking of the Digital Divide and the Human Rights Turn analyzes the impact of the digital divide on human rights from describing the divide, to analyzing the divide, to transcending the divide, and ultimately settles on the human rights-based approach to dissolving and bridging the divide. The article analyzes the impact of the digital divide on human rights from describing the divide to analyzing the divide to transcending the divide, and ultimately focuses on a human rights-based approach to dissolve and bridge the divide. However, the article divides the digital divide phenomenon into access divide, use divide and benefit divide, and it needs to be further clarified whether this viewpoint is recognized by the consensus of the academic community. The paper The New Form of Women's Human Rights in the Digital Era should be about the specific manifestation of feminist jurisprudence in the digital era, which is an extremely basic and important issue under the digital human rights, and no scholars have ever looked at it from a feminist perspective, which can be regarded as an innovation in the research perspective. Dr. Song made a suggestion for the article: the second part of the article, New Symptoms of Violations of Women's Human Rights in the Digital Era and the third part of the article, New Developments of Feminist Movements in the Digital Era both focus on describing from the reality level, and both talk about the new phenomenon, can these two chapters be used to describe the new phenomenon? The two chapters could be combined into one to make them more concise.
The first session on Human Rights Governance of Digital Science and Technology was co-chaired by Mr. Ma Shuangshuang, Vice-President of Jiangsu University Magazine, and Mr. Liu Yaohui, Associate Professor of the Institute of Human Rights at Southeast University.
Zhang Yunhan, a master's student at the Center for Science, Technology and Human Rights of Beijing Institute of Technology (BIT), gave a report entitled Meta-cosmic Empowerment of Human Rights Development and Its Institutional Guarantee in place of Prof. Xiao Junzhong. The report mainly focuses on three aspects: the pathway of meta-cosmic empowerment of human rights development, the mechanism of meta-cosmic empowerment of human rights development, and the risk of meta-cosmic empowerment of human rights development and its institutional guarantee. According to him, the way of human rights development empowered by the meta-universe is mainly manifested in the expansion of freedom of choice through rich ways of communication, the dataization of resources to promote the realization of cultural rights, and the construction of smart cities to promote the protection of economic and social rights. Then, he elaborated the mechanism of meta-cosmos-enabled human rights development from three aspects: infrastructure construction, identity system improvement and value system guidance. Finally, he summarized the three major risks facing the development of meta-universe-enabled human rights, including the lack of basic rights protection, data barriers exacerbating inequality and re-centering eroding human subjectivity. In this regard, Prof. Xiao believes that the soft law system of the meta-universe system should be improved with the concept of human rights, and the related basic system should be perfected to create an international sharing mechanism for human rights digitization.
Mr. Yuan Xiaoyu, Associate Professor of the School of Criminal Justice of Shanghai University of Political Science and Law, gave a presentation entitled On the Right to Protection of Personal Information of Community Correctional Clients. The report is divided into five parts: raising problems, dimensions of personal information of community correctional clients, theoretical evidence of the right to protection of personal information of community correctional clients, analysis of extraterritorial protection paths based on judicial cases, and realization paths of protection. According to Mr. Yuan, in the context of the advent of digital society and the rise of intelligent correction, the protection of personal information of community correctional clients has been difficult to cope with the theoretical framework of the protection of offenders' rights in the past. The dimension and nature of the personal information of community correctional clients determine the limitations of the protection path of the right to personal information in terms of individual interests. The right to protection of personal information of community correctional clients is not only a basic right established by the Constitution of China, but also an important path for the protection of personal information of convicted criminals in other countries. Our country should focus on the obligation of state protection of personal information, and the state should fulfill both positive and negative obligations, so as to guarantee the smooth return of the data subject, who is the subject of community corrections, to the society.
Gong Weitao, a doctoral student at Fudan University Law School, gave a presentation entitled On the Protection of Digital Human Rights in ChatGPT. The rapporteur mainly focused on the concepts of digital human rights and ChatGPT, the challenges posed by ChatGPT to digital human rights, and the corresponding countermeasures. He argues that ChatGPT, in which there are risks of data security that may leak personal information, risks of inequality in the distribution of digital resources, and ethical risks of value bias in the content of the answers, poses challenges to the security, equality and ethical values of digital human rights. China should implement the protection of personal information and the protection of digitally vulnerable groups through a parallel model of government regulation and industry autonomy to prevent the risk of digital ethical values and protect digital human rights.
Liu Jin, a doctoral student at the Law School of Southeast University, gave a presentation entitled On the Goodness Dimension and Value Leadership of Generative Artificial Intelligence Technology - Taking the Importation of Socialist Core Values as a Perspective. The report focuses on three aspects, namely, the goodness dimension of generative AI, the guiding and controlling function of socialist core values, and the leading way of socialist core values. He believes that goodness as a value standard not only requires that the technology itself should meet the purpose of goodness, but also requires that the process of technology application as well as the result of application must be subject to the test of goodness. As a value standard, goodness not only requires that the technology itself should meet the purpose of goodness, but also that the process of technology application and the results of application must be subject to the test of goodness. Socialist core values, which unite the common value pursuits of the Party and the people, can not only guide the development direction of generative AI technology, but also establish the goal of goodness and clarify the scope of its application. Promoting the integration of socialist core values into AI legislation, conducting ethical reviews of science and technology based on socialist core values, and strengthening cyberspace governance in accordance with socialist core values is an important way for the state to lead generative AI technology toward goodness through a value-based approach.
Huang Weiqing, a doctoral student at the Law School of Nanjing University, gave a report entitled Criminal Risk Crisis of Generative Artificial Intelligence and Its Prevention and Control Ideas - Taking ChatGPT as an Example. The reporter mainly focuses on the criminal risk crisis of ChatGPT generative AI, the analysis of the mechanism of crisis generation and the ideas of prevention and control. He believes that the criminal risk caused by ChatGPT can be analyzed from its data output end, data collection end and program access end, and the criminal crimes that may be involved include infringement of intellectual property rights, illegal invasion of computer information systems, leakage of personal privacy, theft of business secrets and even state secrets, etc. The root cause of the criminal risk of ChatGPT is the malfunctioning of the data crawling technology and internal processing mechanism, and the prevention and control of the criminal risk of ChatGPT is based on its mechanism of prevention and control, and the mechanism of prevention and control of the criminal risk. The root cause of the criminal risk of ChatGPT is the data crawling technology and the internal processing mechanism, the prevention and control of which should adhere to the machine rationality centered on human, deny the status of the machine as the main body of criminal responsibility, regulate the developers and users through the existing criminal law provisions as well as the establishment of appropriate crimes, and constantly strengthen the technical ChatGPT system's internal operation program design, external network security environment and its protection mechanism, while clarifying the security obligations of each responsible subject.
Lu Qi, a doctoral student at Fudan University Law School, gave a report entitled Conceptual Innovation and Legalization Path of Corporate Digital Responsibility in the Era of Generative Artificial Intelligence. The reporter mainly focuses on four aspects: the conceptual innovation of corporate digital responsibility, the justification basis of legalization of corporate digital responsibility, the analysis of legalization types of corporate digital responsibility and the legalization path of corporate digital responsibility. He believes that the ethical risks and moral dilemmas brought about by artificial intelligence require the introduction of the concept of corporate digital responsibility as a solution to the challenges of shared governance in the digital era. The legalization of corporate digital responsibility has its legitimate basis, and under the guidance of legalization, it can be typified into three levels: corporate digital responsibility that complies with the rules of the law, corporate digital responsibility that complies with the principles of the law, and corporate digital responsibility that transcends the law. The realization mechanism of legalization is the core of stimulating corporate social responsibility and ethical adherence, which can be achieved through the paths of standardization, antinomy and corporate law, the construction of the governance network of hard law bottom-line governance and soft law synergistic governance, the establishment of external incentive mechanisms such as the corporate digital responsibility reporting system and third-party certification and evaluation system, and the implementation of the optimization of the board of directors' structure and the construction of the director's duty of compliance, and other internal multilevel corporate governance programs.
Ren Wenyou, a doctoral student from Wuhan University School of Law, made a presentation entitled On the Limitations and Improvement Path of Legal Algorithmization. The report is mainly divided into four parts: starting point, overview, evaluation and program. He argued that legal algorithmization, although closely linked to the concept of credible artificial intelligence, is unable to achieve algorithmic credibility, and needs to be combined with digital human rights to jointly solve the problem of algorithmic trust. The existing critique fails to recognize the rationality of legal algorithmization and the intrinsic quality of the law's pursuit of stability, and questions the theoretical significance of legal algorithmization only from the perspective of legal value, which is powerless. Legal algorithmization mistakenly believes that the algorithmic trust dilemma only stems from the algorithmic technical risk, ignoring that the generation of the algorithmic trust dilemma is closely related to the opacity of knowledge and the imbalance of the distribution of interest and risk. From the perspective of overcoming the algorithmic trust crisis, legal algorithmization should maintain sufficient restraint, develop more legal risk prevention techniques, and interfere less with the distribution of rights and obligations. With the cooperation of digital human rights, legal algorithmization can be used as an opportunity to develop the model of algorithmic cooperative governance and optimize legal algorithmization in algorithmic cooperative governance.
Zhang Jingjing, a doctoral student at the School of Law of Beijing Institute of Technology, gave a report entitled How can information be self-determined - the normative construction of citizens' right to information self-determination under the alienation of platform information power. The rapporteur mainly focused on three aspects: the nature of platform power, the alienation and realistic dilemma of platform information power, and the normative construction of citizens' information self-determination in the constitution. She believes that in the information interaction pattern of information monopoly, information filtering and information consumption, the platform information power has been distorted and alienated, which brings about the public question of doubtful public opinion, the autonomy question of cocoon shackle, and the factual question of traffic being king. The construction of digital human rights is inevitably directed at solving the dilemma of digital users' exercise of the right to information self-determination as well as the platform's monopoly and arbitrary filtering of information, with the ultimate goal of realizing the full flow of information and citizens' right to information self-determination, and providing a prerequisite for the construction of the platform's public discussion space and the promotion of the people's democracy of the whole process of the network. In the face of alienated platform power, there is an urgent need for constitutional interpretation and second-order protection of citizens' right to information self-determination at the constitutional level.
In the talk session, Vice Dean Han Jing of Changsha College Law School spoke first. She put forward three suggestions for the first report: first, in the meta-universe, digital identities enable people to interact with each other in a broader and freer way, but how to protect personal privacy and data security in this freedom, and how to cope with the risk of more and more frequent cyber-frauds should be the focus of the paper's further discussion; second, the authors should pay more attention to the fact that the digital technology or digital resources are not being abused; third, the authors mentioned the smart city construction, but how to protect the digitally disadvantaged should also be a question answered by the paper at a time when the digital divide still exists. For the second report, she believed that the authors should pay attention to the public attributes of personal information in addition to the private attributes of personal information. Under the premise of ensuring data security, the maintenance of public interest should be emphasized, and the relationship between privacy and public interest should be balanced.
Yang Jie, a researcher at the Judicial Big Data Research Center of Southeast University, pointed out that the third to the fifth papers had in common the fact that they all focused on the topic of generative AI, and they all adhered to the principle of human-centeredness, and they all stood from the perspective of public law. Mr. Yang raised three questions: first, what kind of legal interests are threatened by generative AI, and is this really a problem unique to ChatGPT? We should focus on the real problem of technological increment. Second, how should we normatively evaluate emerging technologies, or what should guide emerging technologies at the value level. Third, if the law intervenes in the control of digital technology, what are the ways of judicial and administrative remedies, and how do they differ from traditional remedies.
Zhang Yunhao, a researcher at the Civil Prosecution Research Center of Southeast University, believes that the sixth report has chosen a sharp topic and realized a typology of content, but the biggest problem is that it does not distinguish between legal and ethical responsibility, because if the corporate data responsibility itself includes moral responsibility, how to legalize it again. He pointed out that the seventh paper is well-argued and rich in content, but the problem is that it is top-heavy, with too much descriptive content in the first part, and suggested that it should demonstrate in detail the difference and connection between legalization of algorithms and legal algorithmization. As for the eighth paper, he thought that the problem with the paper was that it was not focused enough and should focus on the alienation of platforms.
The second session on The Basic Content of Digital Human Rights was co-chaired by Dr. Haijin Wu, Director of the Urban Institute of the Nanjing Academy of Social Sciences, and Associate Professor Lu Lu of the Law School of Southeast University.
Wang Yuling, a doctoral student at the Human Rights Research Institute of Southeast University, presented a report entitled The Construction of Offline Right for Work-Life Balance, which put forward a suitable path for the construction of offline right in China. Wang Yuling suggested that it is difficult to introduce and implement offline rights in China, and based on the protection measures of offline rights in the EU, we should implement a working hours protection system based on the national conditions of our country, rectify the misaligned relationship between labor and capital, and set up the concept of work-life balance, so as to realize the protection of offline rights.
Li Kang, a doctoral student from Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, made a presentation entitled The Constitutional Protection Framework of the Right to be Forgotten in the Digital Age. Li Kang proposed that the sectoral law protection of the right to be forgotten has certain limitations in China and should be protected as a constitutional fundamental right. On the basis of comparative research, Li Kang believes that China should choose a relative protection program for the right to be forgotten, and construct a constitutional protection framework for the right to be forgotten in terms of both protection and restriction.
Gong Zhiwang, a doctoral student at the Law School of Hainan University, gave a presentation entitled Digital Human Rights Construction with Data Security as the Core. Gong Zhiwang pointed out that although the concept of digital human rights is still theoretically controversial, it has its own generation of the background of the times. And in the theoretical construction of digital human rights, the human rights attributes of digital security should be emphasized, and on this basis, the pluralistic obligatory subjects of digital human rights should be established.
Mr. Sun Menglong, a doctoral student of Heilongjiang University Law School, made a report entitled New Theory of Data Property - Based on the Perspective Change from Physicality to Informativeness. According to Sun Menglong, the property traceability system brought about by spontaneous algorithms in digital society is quite different from that of the traditional tangible property theory which emphasizes the domination of possession, and the current research on data property should go beyond the theoretical shackles of physical boundaries to reconstruct the legal connotation of civil property in the digital era.
Xiamen University Law School doctoral student Xiao-Kun Dai made a report entitled digital era copyright system and cultural rights to protect the gap and bridge - the value of the user's rights to reshape and system adjustment. Dai Xiaokun proposed that in the context of digital technology empowering cultural production practices, the limitations of traditional copyright theory in the protection of the public's cultural rights have become increasingly prominent, and therefore the copyright system should be subject to a certain degree of value reshaping and institutional adaptation.
Huang Yanteng, a doctoral student at the School of Law of Beijing Institute of Technology, gave a presentation entitled Transformation and Legal Harmonization of Workers' Freedom of Expression in the Perspective of Digital Rights. Huang Yanteng suggested that platform technology has intensified employers' control over workers' online speech, resulting in human rights protection dilemmas such as limited autonomy in the field of personal speech, and that judicial practice should incorporate a variety of specific circumstances into the review of the legitimacy of workers' speech, and explore a new type of freedom of speech strategy for workers in a platform society.
Liang Dong, a postdoctoral fellow from the School of Law of Beijing Institute of Technology, presented a report entitled Rule of Law Response to the Bargaining Imbalance in the Labor Market under the Platform Economy: Breaking the Shackles and Expanding the Application of Collective Labor Rights. Liang Dong pointed out that in the context of the increasingly prominent bargaining imbalance in the labor market of the platform economy, the collective labor right should be applied to the practitioners of the new platform industry under the non-standard labor relationship, and focused on the rule of law solutions such as the legislative positioning, organization construction and collective bargaining.
In the talk session, Associate Professor Tang Shuyan, Associate Dean of Law School of Hunan University of Technology, commented on the reports of Wang Yuling and Li Kang. Ms. Tang suggested that whether the right to be offline should be a new form of the traditional right to rest or an extension of the right is still worthy of further discussion, and that the basic theories of digital human rights discussed in today's meeting can provide some reference for the study of the right to be offline. The right to be forgotten is an emerging research hotspot, and it is of practical significance to start from the constitutional framework, which can also be considered to increase the content of constitutional review in the research.
Yang Yuxian, researcher of Wuhan Academy of Social Sciences, commented on the reports through online format. On the basis of affirming the reports of several reporters, she also made suggestions for related research. Ms. Yang suggested that the specific construction of digital human rights in Gong Zhiwang's report needs to be clearer, while the core position of data security needs stronger theoretical arguments, and the concept of digital enterprise or enterprise digitalization is also worth considering; Sun Menglong's report adopts a cross-disciplinary research perspective, in which the concept of data property can be further clarified, and the flow of data property in practice is worth paying attention to; Dai Xiaoxun The report involves more rights genus, whether the content of different rights is easy to exist between a certain confusion, specific research content can be focused on the practice of the digital age.
Wang Yuan, lecturer of Southeast University School of Law, highly affirmed the reports of Huang Yanteng and Liang Dong in terms of problem awareness, logical framework and language expression, but also made suggestions for the research of the two reporters. Mr. Wang pointed out that the research should pay attention to the definition and use of relevant concepts, such as the freedom of speech of workers, the right to be forgotten and the right to be deleted; the whole research needs to focus on the research problem, and the analysis and conclusions should not deviate from the main line of research;The reading and use of relevant and important literature should be increased in conjunction with the chosen research topic to enhance the argument of the research question.
The second session on Digital Human Rights Protection was co-chaired by Mr. Zhang Shuguang, Associate Editor, Director of the Editorial Board of the Journal of Educational Sciences of Hunan Normal University, and Mr. Hong Danna, Associate Professor, School of Law, South China University of Technology.
Researcher Chen Daoying, Secretary General of the Human Rights Research Institute of Dongnan University, gave a presentation entitled Power-Rights Structure in the Digital Era: Changes and Responses. Chen Daoying suggested that in the digital age, the constitutional power-rights structure has become imbalanced to a certain extent, which is mainly caused by the failure of the existing power constraint mechanism and the digital transformation of the infringement of fundamental rights. Therefore, the balance of the constitutional power-right structure should be rebuilt by improving the state's ability to protect basic rights and clarifying the boundaries of basic rights on oversized digital platforms.
Dr. Wei Wensong of the Human Rights Research Institute of Southeast University made a presentation titled Rethinking and Reconstructing Citizens' Data Rights Protection Models in the Digital Era. Wei Wensong pointed out that the traditional individual control and social utilization models for the protection of citizens' data rights have relatively neglected the national strategic significance of data as a social resource, while the national governance model can effectively make up for the deficiencies of the existing model, which can help to fully respond to the demand for the rights of the advanced development of data.
Yang Junpeng, a doctoral student at the School of Administrative Law of Southwest University of Political Science and Law, gave a report entitled The Rule of Law Configuration of Capacity Embedded in the Protection of the Intellectually Disadvantaged. Yang Junpeng proposed that, under the perspective of feasible capacity, the mentally handicapped is embodied in the weakening of the right to social development, and the rule of law path of the mentally handicapped protection should be constructed around the conditions required for the formation and promotion of capacity.
Chen Yongbin, a full-time member of the Trial Committee of Huangyan District People's Court, Taizhou City, Zhejiang Province, made a report titled Criminal Law Protection of Sensitive Personal Information under the Perspective of Data Compliance--Taking the Construction of Data Security Management System as a Perspective. Chen Yongbin proposed that in the context of big data technology application, the introduction of data compliance program is a feasible path to break through the dilemma of criminal law protection of sensitive personal information, and the corresponding criminal law protection system should be constructed from the aspects of security risk prevention, improvement of data security management system, and criminalization scheme of related crimes.
Li Mengrui, a doctoral student from Xiamen University Law School, made a presentation entitled Procedural Restrictions on Communication Data Inspection. Mr. Li Mengrui pointed out that the form of storage of communication content in the data era may lead to the risk of constitutionality of communication data inspection. In both investigative and trial procedures, law enforcement agencies should be bound by the principle of minimization of procedures in the examination of communications data.
Zhang Yuxuan, a doctoral student from Nankai University Law School, presented a report entitled Study on Reasonableness Determination of Reasonable Use of Personal Health Information - Taking the Three-Step Test Method as a Path. Zhang Yuxuan proposed that there are methodological limitations in the current judicial practice of determining the reasonable use of personal health information, and that reference can be made to the experience of the reasonable use of copyright, and an attempt can be made to establish a double-list model of the reasonable use of information, and to use the three-step test as a method of determining the reasonableness of the use of information. It can refer to the experience of copyright reasonable use to try to establish a double list model in information reasonable use, and use the three-step test as the determination method of reasonableness.
Zhang Lei, a lecturer from the Law School of Anhui Normal University, made a report entitled Instrumental Rationality: Alienation Risks and Dissolution of Intelligent Community Correction for Juvenile Offenders. Zhang Lei proposed that under the background of strong intervention of digital technology and artificial intelligence, there is a risk of alienation of instrumental rationality in intelligent community correction for juvenile offenders, and the interests of minors should be realized to the greatest extent by means of rational discipline and emotional governance.
In the talk session, researcher Yu Wei of Digital Governance Research Institute of China University of Political Science and Law made a detailed overview and highly affirmed the reports of several reporters, and at the same time also pointed out that digital governance research has a strong attribute of the times, and has a certain practical significance and theoretical significance. In practice, the construction of smart platform represented by administrative law enforcement has been carried out in some areas in an orderly manner, and this work improves the digital level of urban governance while optimizing the life experience of the public, and these digital governance practices are worth focusing on.
Researcher Ji Yang of the Center for Network Security and Rule of Law Studies at Southeast University said that the reports of several reporters have focused on the protection of civil rights in the digital era. Mr. Ji emphasized that the network platform itself has a double subject attribute, which has received insufficient attention at the level of criminal law, and the relevant theoretical issues still need to be further clarified, and the analysis of the power structure cut from the perspective of public law is very important. The argumentation of the principle of minimal proceduralization involved in the report can be combined with the specific provisions in the relevant judicial interpretations and opinions.
The closing ceremony was presided over by Prof. Liu Qichuan, Secretary of the Party Committee of the Law School of Southeast University.
First, Prof. Yang Chunfu, Vice Dean of the Institute for Human Rights of Southeast University, summarized the meeting. First, Prof. Yang led us to review the whole day's proceedings, pointing out that the young scholars who spoke at this conference accounted for one-half of the conference, indicating that there are new generations of human rights researchers in China. Then, Prof. Yang reviewed in detail the views of President Lu, Prof. Chang and other speakers, and extracted three keywords: digital age, human rights in the digital age, human rights protection. First, the digital age. First, digital era is first and foremost to explore the real impact of digital technology on human life, and to pay more attention to concrete practices. Secondly, the scope of human rights in the digital age and digital human rights are not exactly the same. Digital human rights is more of a conceptual issue, while the most important feature of Chinese modernization is people-oriented, which is different from capitalist modernization's capital-based. Of course, Professor Yang does not advocate the generalization of emerging human rights into universal human rights, and he believes that digital human rights need more scholarly interpretation. Thirdly, regarding human rights protection, Prof. Yang used Mr. Liu Pu's article as an example, encouraging young scholars to integrate the specific challenges of the digital era into specific rights concepts, thus advocating young scholars to try to think more diversely, and to beware of academic speculation. Finally, on behalf of the conference, Prof. Yang once again expressed his gratitude to all the leaders, experts, teachers and students of the conference team for their participation.
Finally, Mr. Qi Mingjie, Director of the Secretariat of the China Society for Human Rights Studies, made a closing statement. First of all, Mr. Qi expressed his gratitude to the organizers and the participants, and believed that it was of great practical significance for this seminar to be held in the context of the world of international disputes, the digital era and the 75th World Human Rights Day, and that the conference had carried out sufficiently rich academic discussions and set up a new benchmark for the study of digital human rights. Director Qi summarized the conference as three major features, namely, the forward-looking topic design, which not only solves the real problems in the digital era, but also leads the trend of theoretical research; the ideological height of the conference discussion, which not only focuses on the core and cutting-edge issues of human rights protection in the digital era, but also pays attention to the important issues in practice; and the rejuvenation of the delegates, which has made the conference an important opportunity to unite the young people and discover the talents, and the young scholars have shown vigorous research enthusiasm. scholars showed vigorous research enthusiasm. Finally, Mr. Qi proposed that researchers of digital human rights should increase the sense of urgency, strengthen theoretical research, and seize the international discourse of digital human rights, and called on young scholars to pay more attention to and support the work of China Society for Human Rights Studies.
At this point, the conference was successfully concluded with the applause of all participants.