{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,3]],"date-time":"2026-10-03T06:53:01Z","timestamp":1791010381761,"version":"4.1.0"},"reference-count":55,"publisher":"VidhiAagaz","issue":"V","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,3]],"date-time":"2026-10-03T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1790985600000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["IJLMH"],"abstract":"<jats:p>The proliferation of artificial intelligence across public and private sectors has positioned algorithmic decision-making at the heart of consequential outcomes, from criminal sentencing and credit scoring to healthcare allocation and employment screening. Yet the opacity of AI systems, combined with fragmented governance structures, has created a significant accountability deficit that threatens the realisation of fundamental human rights. This paper addresses the central research question: to what extent do existing human rights legal frameworks impose enforceable accountability and transparency obligations on states and corporate actors deploying AI systems? Using a doctrinal legal analysis methodology, the paper systematically examines primary legal instruments, including the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the EU AI Act, and UNESCO\u2019s Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, to assess their capacity to govern AI-driven decision-making in rights-sensitive contexts. With special reference to the Indian constitutional framework, anchored in the Supreme Court\u2019s landmark recognition of privacy as a fundamental right in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017), and to the emerging architecture of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, the paper situates India\u2019s governance challenges within the global accountability debate. The paper identifies critical governance gaps, including the absence of enforceable audit mechanisms, inadequate redress pathways for rights-affected individuals, and the difficulty of attributing legal responsibility across complex AI supply chains. It concludes by proposing a human rights-by-design governance model that embeds accountability and transparency obligations across the full AI lifecycle, offering a principled framework for reconciling technological innovation with fundamental rights protection.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.63108\/ijlmh.12896","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,3]],"date-time":"2026-10-03T06:19:24Z","timestamp":1791008364000},"page":"1419-1434","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Accountability and Transparency in AI Systems: A Human Rights Perspective"],"prefix":"10.63108","volume":"9","author":[{"given":"Nikita","family":"Sharma","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Ph.D. Scholar at Geeta Global School of Law, Geeta University, Panipat, Haryana, India"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Sandeep","family":"Saini","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Associate Professor and Head at Geeta Global School of Law, Geeta University, Panipat, Haryana, India"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"19992","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,3]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref1","unstructured":"Virginia Eubanks, Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor 8\u201312 (St. Martin\u2019s Press 2018)."},{"key":"ref2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Kate Crawford, Atlas of AI: Power, Politics, and the Planetary Costs of Artificial Intelligence 211\u201314 (Yale Univ. Press 2021).","DOI":"10.12987\/9780300252392"},{"key":"ref3","unstructured":"Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, \u00b6\u00b6 6, 55, transmitted by Note of the Secretary-General, U.N. Doc. A\/73\/348 (Aug. 29, 2018) [hereinafter SR Freedom of Expression Report]."},{"key":"ref4","unstructured":"NITI Aayog, National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence 3\u20137 (Gov\u2019t of India 2018), https:\/\/www.niti.gov.in\/sites\/default\/files\/2023-03\/National-Strategy-for-Artificial-Intelligence.pdf [hereinafter NITI Aayog AI Strategy]."},{"key":"ref5","unstructured":"NITI Aayog, Responsible AI #AIForAll: Approach Document for India, Part 1: Principles for Responsible AI 41\u201342 (Gov\u2019t of India 2021), https:\/\/www.niti.gov.in\/sites\/default\/files\/2021-02\/Responsible-AI-22022021.pdf [hereinafter NITI Aayog Responsible AI Part 1]."},{"key":"ref6","unstructured":"Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1 (India) [hereinafter Puttaswamy]."},{"key":"ref7","unstructured":"International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights arts. 2(3), 14, 17, Dec. 16, 1966, 999 U.N.T.S. 171 [hereinafter ICCPR]."},{"key":"ref8","unstructured":"U.N. Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 31: The Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant, \u00b6 8, U.N. Doc. CCPR\/C\/21\/Rev.1\/Add.13 (May 26, 2004)."},{"key":"ref9","unstructured":"ICCPR, supra note 7, art. 17; U.N. Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 16: The Right to Respect of Privacy, Family, Home and Correspondence, and Protection of Honour and Reputation, \u00b6 10 (Apr. 8, 1988), U.N. Doc. HRI\/GEN\/1\/Rev.1 (1994)."},{"key":"ref10","unstructured":"U.N. Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 32: Article 14: Right to Equality Before Courts and Tribunals and to a Fair Trial, \u00b6\u00b6 15\u201316, U.N. Doc. CCPR\/C\/GC\/32 (Aug. 23, 2007)."},{"key":"ref11","unstructured":"Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations \u201cProtect, Respect and Remedy\u201d Framework, Principles 11\u201315, U.N. Doc. A\/HRC\/17\/31, annex (Mar. 21, 2011), endorsed by H.R.C. Res. 17\/4 (June 16, 2011), https:\/\/www.ohchr.org\/sites\/default\/files\/documents\/publications\/guidingprinciplesbusinesshr_en.pdf [hereinafter UNGPs]."},{"key":"ref12","unstructured":"UNGPs, supra note 11, Principle 17 (human rights due diligence encompasses identification, prevention, mitigation, and accounting for impacts)."},{"key":"ref13","unstructured":"UNGPs, supra note 11, Principles 25\u201331 (access to remedy pillar)."},{"key":"ref14","unstructured":"UNESCO, Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, \u00b6\u00b6 4, 42\u201347, U.N. Doc. SHS\/BIO\/PI\/2021\/1 (Nov. 23, 2021), https:\/\/www.unesco.org\/en\/legal-affairs\/recommendation-ethics-artificial-intelligence [hereinafter UNESCO AI Recommendation]."},{"key":"ref15","unstructured":"UNESCO AI Recommendation, supra note 14, \u00b6\u00b6 37\u201341 (transparency and explainability; \u00b6 40 defining explainability)."},{"key":"ref16","unstructured":"Regulation (EU) 2024\/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 Laying Down Harmonised Rules on Artificial Intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act), arts. 9\u201317, 2024 O.J. (L 1689) 1, https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/eli\/reg\/2024\/1689\/oj [hereinafter EU AI Act]."},{"key":"ref17","unstructured":"EU AI Act, supra note 16, art. 113; Regulation (EU) 2026\/1744 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 July 2026 Amending Regulations (EU) 2024\/1689, (EU) 2018\/1139 and (EU) 2023\/1230 as Regards the Simplification of the Implementation of Harmonised Rules on Artificial Intelligence (Digital Omnibus on AI), 2026 O.J. (L 1744) 1, https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/eli\/reg\/2026\/1744\/oj."},{"key":"ref18","unstructured":"EU AI Act, supra note 16, arts. 6\u20137 & annex III (classification of high-risk AI systems and Annex III categories including critical infrastructure, employment, and access to essential services)."},{"key":"ref19","unstructured":"EU AI Act, supra note 16, arts. 13\u201314 (transparency and human oversight requirements for high-risk AI systems)."},{"key":"ref20","unstructured":"EU AI Act, supra note 16, art. 9 (risk management system requirements throughout AI lifecycle)."},{"key":"ref21","unstructured":"Regulation (EU) 2016\/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the Protection of Natural Persons with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data and on the Free Movement of Such Data (General Data Protection Regulation), arts. 13\u201315, 22, 2016 O.J. (L 119) 1, https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/eli\/reg\/2016\/679\/oj [hereinafter GDPR]."},{"key":"ref22","unstructured":"GDPR, supra note 21, art. 22(1)\u2013(3) & recital 71 (rights in relation to automated individual decision-making, including profiling)."},{"key":"ref23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Sandra Wachter, Brent Mittelstadt & Luciano Floridi, Why a Right to Explanation of Automated Decision-Making Does Not Exist in the General Data Protection Regulation, 7 Int\u2019l Data Privacy L. 76, 77\u201380 (2017), https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/idpl\/ipx005.","DOI":"10.1093\/idpl\/ipx005"},{"key":"ref24","unstructured":"Case C-203\/22, CK v. Magistrat der Stadt Wien (Dun & Bradstreet Austria), ECLI:EU:C:2025:117 (Feb. 27, 2025)."},{"key":"ref25","unstructured":"Puttaswamy, supra note 6."},{"key":"ref26","unstructured":"Puttaswamy, supra note 6, \u00b6\u00b6 310, 325 (Chandrachud J., for the plurality) (three-fold requirement of legality, need defined in terms of a legitimate state aim, and proportionality ensuring a rational nexus between the objects and the means adopted)."},{"key":"ref27","unstructured":"Puttaswamy, supra note 6 (Kaul J.) (the right of an individual to control the dissemination of personal information as a component of the fundamental right to privacy, and the need for a data protection framework)."},{"key":"ref28","unstructured":"Digital Personal Data Protection Act, No. 22 of 2023, \u00a7\u00a7 4\u20136, 12\u201313 (India) [hereinafter DPDPA]."},{"key":"ref29","unstructured":"Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Notification Appointing the Dates of Commencement of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, Gazette of India, Extraordinary, pt. II sec. 3(i) (Nov. 13, 2025) (India) (bringing \u00a7\u00a7 18\u201326 into force on Nov. 13, 2025 and \u00a7\u00a7 3\u201317 into force eighteen months thereafter); The Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, Gazette of India, Extraordinary, pt. II sec. 3(i) (Nov. 13, 2025) (India)."},{"key":"ref30","unstructured":"DPDPA, supra note 28, \u00a7 17(2)(a) (power of the Central Government to exempt, by notification, instrumentalities of the State in the interests of sovereignty, security of the State, public order and other listed grounds, potentially broad enough to insulate government AI systems from accountability requirements)."},{"key":"ref31","unstructured":"The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, r. 4(4) (India) (requiring significant social media intermediaries to endeavour to deploy automated tools, subject to appropriate human oversight and periodic review, but not imposing substantive algorithmic accountability on AI decision-making systems generally)."},{"key":"ref32","unstructured":"NITI Aayog Responsible AI Part 1, supra note 5, at 41\u201342; see also Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Report on AI Governance Guidelines Development (Jan. 6, 2025) (released for public consultation); Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, India AI Governance Guidelines (Nov. 5, 2025)."},{"key":"ref33","unstructured":"NITI Aayog AI Strategy, supra note 4, at 18 (citing Accenture\u2019s estimate that AI could boost India\u2019s annual growth rate by 1.3 percentage points by 2035)."},{"key":"ref34","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Frank Pasquale, The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information 3\u20138 (Harvard Univ. Press 2015).","DOI":"10.4159\/harvard.9780674736061"},{"key":"ref35","unstructured":"Tal Z. Zarsky, Transparent Predictions, 2013 U. Ill. L. Rev. 1503, 1508\u201312."},{"key":"ref36","unstructured":"GDPR, supra note 21, arts. 13\u201314 (information to be provided; no guarantee of technical interpretability of model logic)."},{"key":"ref37","unstructured":"EU AI Act, supra note 16, art. 13(1) (high-risk AI systems shall be designed and developed in such a way as to ensure that their operation is sufficiently transparent to enable deployers to interpret a system\u2019s output and use it appropriately); id. art. 86."},{"key":"ref38","unstructured":"Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Appointment to the Post of Chairperson and Other Members in the Data Protection Board of India, F. No. 2(1)\/2026-Pers.I (May 6, 2026) (India), https:\/\/www.meity.gov.in\/static\/uploads\/2026\/05\/cd481c027470b420b4cb85fb40a91c53.pdf."},{"key":"ref39","unstructured":"ICCPR, supra note 7, art. 2(3) (effective remedy obligation extends to all violations of Covenant rights, including those caused by private actors where the State fails to exercise due diligence); see General Comment No. 31, supra note 8, \u00b6 8."},{"key":"ref40","unstructured":"EU AI Act, supra note 16, arts. 85\u201386 (right to lodge a complaint with a market surveillance authority; right to an explanation of individual decision-making based on the output of a high-risk AI system listed in Annex III)."},{"key":"ref41","unstructured":"DPDPA, supra note 28, \u00a7 13 (right of grievance redressal with the Data Fiduciary); see supra notes 29, 38 (commencement of \u00a7 13 deferred to May 2027; Board without a Chairperson or Members as of May 2026)."},{"key":"ref42","unstructured":"UNGPs, supra note 11, Principles 12\u201315 (corporate responsibility to respect covers all internationally recognised human rights across the full value chain of operations)."},{"key":"ref43","unstructured":"EU AI Act, supra note 16, arts. 16, 23\u201326 (obligations of providers, importers, distributors and deployers, and responsibilities along the AI value chain)."},{"key":"ref44","unstructured":"UNESCO AI Recommendation, supra note 14, \u00b6\u00b6 62\u201367 (requiring, at \u00b6 65, that the actions of AI actors be consistent with international human rights law throughout the life cycle of AI systems)."},{"key":"ref45","unstructured":"UNGPs, supra note 11, Principle 17(c) (human rights due diligence should be ongoing, recognising that human rights risks may change over time)."},{"key":"ref46","unstructured":"EU AI Act, supra note 16, art. 43 (conformity assessment of high-risk AI systems; assessment involving a notified body is required only for certain biometric systems under point 1 of Annex III, the other Annex III systems following internal control)."},{"key":"ref47","unstructured":"NITI Aayog, Responsible AI #AIForAll: Approach Document for India, Part 2: Operationalizing Principles for Responsible AI 14\u201318 (Gov\u2019t of India 2021), https:\/\/www.niti.gov.in\/sites\/default\/files\/2021-08\/Part2-Responsible-AI-12082021.pdf [hereinafter NITI Aayog Responsible AI Part 2]."},{"key":"ref48","unstructured":"UNESCO AI Recommendation, supra note 14, \u00b6 38 (individuals should be able to access the reasons for a decision affecting their rights)."},{"key":"ref49","unstructured":"EU AI Act, supra note 16, art. 14(4)(d) (natural persons assigned human oversight must be enabled to decide not to use the system or to disregard, override or reverse its output)."},{"key":"ref50","unstructured":"DPDPA, supra note 28, \u00a7\u00a7 18, 27 (establishing the Board and defining its powers by reference to personal data breaches and non-compliance with the Act, with no algorithmic audit function); see supra note 38."},{"key":"ref51","unstructured":"UNGPs, supra note 11, Principle 31 (effectiveness criteria for non-judicial grievance mechanisms)."},{"key":"ref52","unstructured":"Eubanks, supra note 1, at 211\u201315 (decommissioning accountability: the rights harms of legacy AI systems that continue to affect individuals after formal discontinuation)."},{"key":"ref53","unstructured":"Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power 502\u201307 (PublicAffairs 2019)."},{"key":"ref54","unstructured":"NITI Aayog Responsible AI Part 2, supra note 47, at 30\u201334."},{"key":"ref55","unstructured":"Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2019) 1 SCC 1 (India) (the Aadhaar judgment)."}],"container-title":["International Journal of Law Management &amp; Humanities"],"original-title":[],"link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/ijlmh.com\/article\/download\/accountability-transparency-ai-systems-human-rights-perspective\/1235","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/ijlmh.com\/article\/download\/accountability-transparency-ai-systems-human-rights-perspective\/1236","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/ijlmh.com\/article\/download\/accountability-transparency-ai-systems-human-rights-perspective\/1235","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,3]],"date-time":"2026-10-03T06:19:33Z","timestamp":1791008373000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/ijlmh.com\/article\/view\/accountability-transparency-ai-systems-human-rights-perspective"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,3]]},"references-count":55,"journal-issue":{"issue":"V","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,1]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.63108\/ijlmh.12896","relation":{},"ISSN":["2581-5369"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2581-5369","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,3]]}}}