View to regulating AI in India

TeaHe has attracted significant global attention in the last one year by the rule and regulation of Artificial Intelligence (AI). While the discourse has recently shifted from focusing on social security, inclusiveness and human rights to prioritize innovation and economic prosperity, only some countries or regions have introduced laws to regulate AI so far. These include China, European Union, Canada, Korea, Peru and America (although US President Donald Trump has now canceled the former President who has canceled the Executive Order of Biden related to the use of AI). Several countries, such as UK, Japan, Brazil, Costa Rica, Columbia and Pakistan, draft the bills waiting for approval from their respective legislative assemblies.

A more common approach globally has been a policy or strategy document publishing a road map to take advantage of AI to promote the country’s intentions, schemes, budgets and socio-economic development, while ensuring that the resulting development is inclusive, moral and durable. Around 85 countries and the African Union have published some official (national) AI strategy documents.

India’s approach

However, India has taken a different view. It has neither officially approved National AI Strategy Documents nor a particularly regulating law. Instead, it has focused on its resources on the government mission designed to support the development and adoption of AI. The Niti Aayog Document called ‘National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence’ from 2018, while its suggestions remain a recommendation without comprehensive and strong, Government of India or implementation plan or budget without formal support from the plan or budget. India Mission, through its seven columns, is to promote an innovative, skilled, safe and trusted AI ecosystem. Many initiatives, such as a founder AI model, are in the pipeline. A advisory group of experts is currently working to develop recommendations for the governance structure that may be suitable for India. But there is a limited clarity about whether these recommendations will be adopted in official governance policies or integrated as internal mechanisms.

While there are many benefits of this approach – mainly the developed nature of technologies, their adoption, geopolitics, economics, business and flexibility to adapt plans in response to civilian spirit – it also leaves a significant difference. In particular, it does not provide a comprehensive view of India’s vision, priorities, capacity, achievements, planned milestones, initiatives, or accountability mechanisms. The initiative remains reactive and may not follow a planned trajectory for imagined goals. They also risk dependence on personal leadership.

AI development is mainly concentrated in the US, European Union, UK and China, but India is experiencing rapid and adequate increase in AI adoption. As AI uses an extension of use, it is necessary to ensure that its implementation does not lead to discrimination, exclusion practices, inappropriate consequences, cyber security threats, privacy violations or unequal opportunities. Currently, the railings around the AI ​​implementation are largely voluntary and lack of clarity. There is no public awareness about algorithm use, efficacy, or evaluation metrics, even in areas that affect the daily lives of citizens, such as banking, insurance, education, healthcare and public administration. Subsequently, there are very few citizens discourse on important issues such as algorithmaline alignment, model assessment results, data and content perfections, labor market disruption, or algorithm alignment with potential cyber security and privacy risks with social values. This lack of discussion is especially in the light of the fact that India has already experienced several examples of violence and social loss, in recent years, a large-scale fuel has been given by AI-borne materials on social media platforms.

Lesson to be removed

There are various approaches of AI regime and regulation, and valuable lessons can be prepared from how different countries around the world have handled data regulation and policies. With the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, the Government of India has adopted an approach to the European Union General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and China’s Personal Information Protection Act-Cross-Sector, Centralized and Bacha. In contrast, the US has taken a more decentralized and area-specific approach to data protection and privacy. China has implemented laws centered to a variety of AIs (eg, generic AI) or an use case (eg, deep synthesis). India can adopt any of these approaches or develop a hybrid model, which can manufacture on the structure established by the Centralized DPDP Act, 2023.

The AI ​​policy can be a viable short -term target for India. Such a policy will allow the government for pilot enforcement equipment before starting a formal law. Insight from 85AI policies worldwide suggests major areas that should be addressed in official documents. These include India’s vision for AI, AI development and adoption strategies for construction capacity and infrastructure, government authority responsible for policy implementation, moral guidelines for responsible AI use, and priority sectors where AI can run socio-economic development. Public discussion on the use of AI should also be started by the government immediately.

Tulika Avni Sinha, Senior Research Fellow (Data Governance, Privacy and AI), World Privacy Forum