examining the potential challenges | 10.1163/22131035-14020001 11 human rights, it is argued, are unable to provide guidance when values conflict.51 Building on the arguments of the earlier mentioned proponents for the application of human rights frameworks in ai governance, some human rights scholars convincingly oppose the above views which do not see human rights as being able to provide assistance in this field. Jones asserts that international human rights law may not currently address all the potential harms caused by ai. However, human rights should rather be the starting point for normative constraints on ai, the baseline to which new rights or further ethical guardrails might appropriately be added, including any ethical principles that businesses or other entities may choose to adopt.52 Hogan and Lasek too add that human rights language functions both in moral and legal terms and, therefore, has the capacity to handle both the ethical and legal dimensions of ai.53 In addition to the above arguments, other human rights scholars assert that because the principles of the international human rights framework are thorough and well-defined, they apply to the field of ai and can be modified to accommodate novel situations and changing social norms. Furthermore, it covers the wide range of pressing concerns that ai raises, both procedural and substantive,54 including its provision for accountability and redress. Individuals or groups can file complaints to treaty bodies to hold states accountable when there are violations of these treaties. Furthermore, there are currently significant developments taking place to extend respect for human rights beyond the state to private actors.55 Companies play a critical role in this regard, as they are often the developers of ai technologies, and thus bear a responsibility to respect human rights through measures such as due diligence and impact assessments.56 There is also the development of binding due diligence obligations in Europe.57 States in turn have additional obligations to 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 Jones, (n 32) at 20. Ibid, 15. Linda Hogan and Marta Lasek-Markey, ‘Towards a Human Rights-based Approach to Ethical ai Governance in Europe’ (2024) 9(6) Philosophies 4. Eileen and Metzger, (n 44) at 119. United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights <https://www.ohchr .org/sites/default/files/documents/publications/guidingprinciplesbusinesshr_en.pdf> accessed 30 September 2025. ohchr, ‘B-Tech Project’, https://www.ohchr.org/en/business-and-human-rights/b-tech -project> accessed 30 September 2025. European Union Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, 2022/2464. International Human Rights Law Review (2025) 1–31