The Australian Human Rights Commission has released its groundbreaking report, 'Peace of Mind: Navigating the ethical frontiers of neurotechnology and human rights,' urging government, industry, and civil society to ensure that the rapid development of neurotechnology is grounded in robust human rights protections.
Neurotechnology-devices and systems that interact with the human nervous system-offers transformative potential for health, communication, and daily life. From brain-computer interfaces that restore speech to people with paralysis, to wearable devices that monitor fatigue in the workplace, these innovations are moving from the laboratory into homes, schools, and workplaces across Australia.
The report highlights that neurotechnology can expose sensitive neural data, pose risks to privacy and freedom of thought, and create new forms of discrimination and surveillance. Vulnerable groups-including children, people with disability, and older Australians-face particular risks.
'A technology capable of decoding brain activity or influencing thought processes is, by its nature, deeply personal and profoundly powerful,' said Human Rights Commissioner Lorraine Finlay.
'We must ensure that technological progress does not come at the expense of our most fundamental rights and freedoms.'
'Australia is well placed to lead not only in technical innovation, but also in ethical and rights-respecting neurotechnology. Achieving this will require continued collaboration, investment, and a commitment to "human rights by design".'
'Only by putting human dignity at the centre of our digital lives can we unlock the full potential of neurotechnology-while retaining our peace of mind,' said Commissioner Finlay.
Key findings and recommendations
• Human rights by design: The Commission calls for human rights protections to be embedded at every stage of neurotechnology development, echoing the 'safety by design' approach.
• Privacy and consent: The report urges urgent reform of Australia's privacy laws to explicitly protect neural data. It calls for plain-English privacy policies and meaningful, informed consent for all users.
• Freedom of thought and expression: Neurotechnology must not be used to coerce, manipulate, or punish individuals for their thoughts. The Commission recommends prohibiting neuromarketing for political and consumer purposes, especially targeting children.
• Workplace and consumer protections: The Commission recommends a ban on workplace neurotechnology other than for addressing the most serious work health and safety risks in high-risk industries. The creation of a specialist neurotechnology safety agency will also be necessary to protect consumers and establish effective safety standards.
• Impacted groups: The best interests of children, people with disability, and older people must be central to all neurotechnology policy and practice. The Commission calls for child rights impact assessments and stronger safeguards against discrimination and coercion.
• Criminal justice and military use: The report recommends a moratorium on the use of neurotechnology in criminal justice until an inquiry is conducted by the Australian Law Reform Commission, and calls for regular legal reviews of military applications to ensure compliance with international law.
The new report is available on the Commission's website. Read it here.
