GPAI New Delhi Ministerial Declaration

1. We, Ministers of the Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence (GPAI), convening in New Delhi on 13^th December 2023:

2. Reiterate our unwavering commitment, since the GPAI Council Meeting in Japan last year, to the principles for responsible stewardship of trustworthy AI and values reflected in the OECD Recommendation on AI, as noted in GPAI’s Terms of Reference, rooted in democratic values and human rights, safeguarding dignity and well-being, ensuring personal data protection, protection of applicable intellectual property rights, privacy, and security, fostering innovation, and promoting, trustworthy, responsible, sustainable and human-centred use of AI. 

3. We further affirm our commitment to continue to work within our respective jurisdictions to advance safe, secure, and trustworthy AI, including, as appropriate, through the development of relevant regulations, policies, standards, and other initiatives.

4. We acknowledge the noteworthy progress and achievements under the leadership of Japan as the 2023 Lead Chair with India as the Incoming Support Chair and France as the Outgoing Support Chair. This includes significant efforts related to the strengthening of GPAI as a diverse and inclusive multistakeholder initiative.

5. We applaud the contributions of the Multistakeholder Experts Group (MEG) towards the GPAI projects. We affirm our commitment to supporting the sustainability of GPAI projects by undertaking the adoption of relevant projects, in line with country-specific contexts and priorities as well as the shared interests and priorities of the GPAI community.

6. We recognize the rapid pace of improvement in advanced AI systems and their potential to generate economic growth, innovation, and jobs across various sectors as well as to benefit societies. We acknowledge the need to harness new opportunities and mitigate the risks arising from the development, deployment, and use of such technologies. This includes concerns around misinformation and disinformation, unemployment, lack of transparency and fairness, protection of intellectual property and personal data, and threats to human rights and democratic values. We further acknowledge the need for equitable access to resources, which must be considered, accounted for, or addressed in order for societies to benefit from and build competitive AI solutions. We underscore GPAI’s pivotal role in addressing contemporary AI issues, including generative AI, through applied AI projects aimed at addressing societal problems and global challenges, maximising the benefits and mitigating associated risks.

7. We support the intention of India, as Lead Chair for 2024, in its endeavour to promote collaborative AI for global partnership among GPAI members by supporting projects aimed at promoting equitable access to critical resources for AI research and innovation, such as AI computing, high quality diverse datasets, algorithms, software, testbeds, and other AI-relevant resources in compliance with applicable intellectual property protections and data protection legislations. We reaffirm the importance of fostering (US DEL an)  equitable AI ecosystem (US Add s) that ensures diverse, inclusive and multistakeholder engagement, including from under-represented groups and communities facing vulnerabilities towards the responsible design,  development, deployment, and sustainable use of trustworthy AI.

8. We support the development, in a collaborative manner, of necessary knowledge, skills, infrastructure, policies, risk management frameworks and governance mechanisms to effectively and responsibly leverage AI technologies and applications, including among low and middle-income countries to harness the potential of AI advancements and manage the associated risks, including ensuring robust protection of rights, safety, and security.

9. We embrace the use of AI innovation in supporting sustainable agriculture as a new thematic priority for GPAI. We acknowledge the importance of promoting the development of and access to risk-proportionate trustworthy AI applications for ensuring sustainable food production systems and implementing resilient agricultural practices that increase productivity and production, help regenerate ecosystems, strengthen capacity for mitigation and adaptation to climate change, extreme weather, drought, flooding and other disasters, and that progressively improve land and soil quality, as well as promote inclusion and empowerment of workers in the agricultural supply chain.

10. We commend the efforts undertaken by India, the incoming support chair, the GPAI secretariat, the Expert Support Centres, and the Executive Council to foster enhanced member-expert collaboration and increase the visibility of GPAI, through efforts such as the member-facilitated GPAI working group convenings and the GPAI Innovation Workshop. 

11. We are committed to continuing and strengthening our advocacy efforts to enhance the public visibility of GPAI’s outputs and facilitate the adoption of relevant work wherever feasible. 

12. We note the international community’s efforts over the year to drive international collaboration on AI. To this end, we acknowledge GPAI’s contribution to the G7 leaders’ statement on the Hiroshima AI Process, the Bletchley Declaration, and the G20 New Delhi leaders’ declaration as steps towards working together, in an inclusive manner, to promote trustworthy AI that supports the good of all. 

13. We reaffirm our dedication to strengthening GPAI’s independent and unique identity as a key multilateral initiative for practical approaches to advancing the trustworthy development, deployment, and use of AI. We are committed to positioning GPAI as a nodal initiative that plays a key role in global cooperation on AI innovation and governance, along with its expert support centres. Towards this, we support GPAI’s further engagement with other relevant international fora such as the G20, G7, OECD, UNESCO and other UN bodies, to leverage synergies and avoid duplication of efforts.

14. We reaffirm our commitment to pursuing a diverse membership, with a particular focus on low and middle-income countries to ensure a broad range of expertise, national and regional views and experiences based on our shared values. We are committed to ensuring that GPAI’s mission has a global impact, and helps address diverse global and societal challenges.

Key Provisions of the Bill

Exemptions for the Centre:
One of the contentious aspects of the Bill is the provision that allows the central government to exempt “any instrumentality of the state” from the adverse consequences of data processing, citing reasons such as national security, foreign relations, and maintenance of public order. IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw defended these exemptions, citing scenarios like natural disasters and police investigations where swift action may be required without obtaining consent for data processing.

Comparison with GDPR:
Shri. Vaishnaw pointed out that the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) contains 16 exemptions, while India’s Bill has only four. However, privacy advocates argue that the Indian legislation grants broader powers to the government.

Penalties and Platform Blocking:
The Bill introduces penalties for entities that violate data protection norms. If an entity is penalized on multiple occasions, the central government, after a hearing, can decide to block its platform in the country. This provision adds a layer of enforcement not present in the 2022 draft.

Online Censorship Concerns:
Experts have raised concerns that the Bill, particularly the exemptions and penalties, could contribute to the existing online censorship regime, particularly under Section 69(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

Impact on the Right to Information Act:
Critics worry that the Bill’s provisions protecting the personal data of government functionaries could potentially undermine the RTI Act by making it difficult to share such information with RTI applicants. Shri. Vaishnaw argued that the Bill harmonises RTI and personal data protection.

Data Protection Board:
The control of the Centre in appointing members of the Data Protection Board, which deals with privacy-related grievances and disputes, has been retained. The Chief Executive of the board will be appointed by the central government, raising questions about its independence.

Leeway for Data Processing:
The Bill allows certain “legitimate uses” of personal data without explicit consent. This includes national security, offering services, and employment-related matters.

Age of Consent:
The Centre can process data of citizens below 18 years without parental consent if the platform ensures data processing in a “verifiably safe manner,” addressing concerns in sectors like ed-tech and healthcare.

Cross-Border Data Flows:
The Bill simplifies cross-border data flows, moving from a whitelist to a blacklist approach, allowing data flows by default to all regions unless prohibited by the government. This aims to ensure business continuity.

Significant Data Fiduciaries:
The government can categorise entities as “significant data fiduciaries” based on factors like data volume, electoral democracy risks, and national security impact. Social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and WhatsApp may fall under this category, necessitating the appointment of data protection officers.

Conclusion

The passage of the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, 2023, in India marks a significant step toward establishing a comprehensive data protection framework. However, the Bill’s provisions have raised concerns about exemptions, online censorship, and potential impacts on the RTI Act. As the Bill awaits the President’s assent to become law, it reflects India’s ongoing efforts to strike a balance between privacy protection and innovation, all while addressing the challenges posed by the digital age.

The implications of this legislation will be closely watched by various stakeholders, including businesses, privacy advocates, and citizens, as India navigates the evolving landscape of digital data protection. Balancing individual privacy rights with national security interests is a complex task, and the effectiveness of the Bill in achieving this balance will be revealed in its implementation.

Minister of State for Electronics and IT Rajeev Chandrasekhar, who has also been a strong advocate of Digital Privacy since 2010 recently said while interacting with students of Delhi University that ‘Citizens have the right to say that I gave you consent to use my data and no I want that data and my digital footprint to be removed from this platform.’

Right to be Forgotten safeguards individuals’ privacy and empowers them to regain control over their personal data. In an era where online information can persist indefinitely, this right enables people to request the removal of outdated or irrelevant data that might no longer be accurate or necessary. This clause also vouches for family members who can opt for the removal of the social media profiles of the deceased people. 

Secondly, the Right to be Forgotten fosters a balance between privacy and freedom of expression. While it allows individuals to request the removal of certain information, it also requires careful consideration of public interest and the right to access information. This concept encourages responsible data handling practices among organizations and platforms, ultimately promoting a more transparent and respectful digital environment where individuals can exercise their rights without stifling free speech.

The DPDP Bill was passed in Parliament in early August, read more about it here.