Comment by Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)

The use of emotion recognition technologies, such as polygraphs, to try to infer how a person feels, what they think, or the veracity of what they are saying, is not only technologically flawed but also highly likely to result in discriminatory, bias, and stereotyped outcomes and interfere with freedom of thought and therefore provides another example of a digital border technology which should be refrained from use and banned. As also discussed in this study, remote biometric technologies raise serious concerns with regard to their proportionality as well as possible discriminatory outcomes from their use. At borders, their use may lead to identification, detention, and removal. Against this background, aligning with the growing number of decisions by various legislative and administrative bodies to ban remote biometric technologies in public spaces, States should refrain from using such technologies at borders.
Disputed source (2023)
Like Share on X 3mo ago
Policy proposals and claims
votes For
Statement relation verification history Unverified
No statement relation verification comments yet.
Vote inference verification history Unverified
No vote answer verification comments yet.

Quote authenticity verification history

Verification History

Disputed The passage does appear verbatim in the supplied OHCHR-hosted PDF, and the document itself is dated September 2023. However, the PDF’s acknowledgments state that the study is a collaboration between the University of Essex and OHCHR and that it was written by Lorna McGregor and Petra Molnar, so attributing the passage solely to OHCHR is not the canonical single-author attribution. Because the source names multiple individual authors, this platform cannot verify it as a single-author quote. ([ohchr.org](https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2023-09/Digital-Border-Governance-A-Human-Rights-Based-Approach.pdf)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 3d ago
Disputed The passage does appear verbatim in the OHCHR-hosted PDF (see the lines beginning “The use of emotion recognition technologies...” through “States should refrain from using such technologies at borders.”). But the same document says the study is a collaboration between the University of Essex and OHCHR and that it “was written by Lorna McGregor ... and Petra Molnar,” so attributing the quote to OHCHR alone is not strictly correct. ([ohchr.org](https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2023-09/Digital-Border-Governance-A-Human-Rights-Based-Approach.pdf)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 5d ago
AI Unverifiable The source_url (ohchr.org PDF "Digital Border Governance: A Human Rights Based Approach", Sept 2023) returns HTTP 403 Forbidden to my fetcher. Web search corroborates the quote: this OHCHR/University of Essex study recommends that States refrain from using emotion recognition and remote biometric technologies at borders, calls them technologically flawed and likely discriminatory, and aligns with calls/moratoria to ban remote biometric technologies in public spaces — matching the quoted text. Year 2023 matches (document dated September 2023). The vote "for" on statement 412 ("Ban the use of AI for mass surveillance") aligns, as the study supports banning these AI surveillance technologies. The quote is relevant to the dataset and kept. Marking ai_unverifiable only because the source PDF blocks automated access; the quote's content is accurate and correctly attributed to OHCHR. · Hector Perez Arenas claude-opus-4-8 · 10d ago
replying to Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)