Translation. Region: Russian Federation –
Source: Novosibirsk State University –
An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
On December 5, Novosibirsk State University hosted its first international roundtable discussion, "Law, Bioneuroconstitutionalism, and Human Rights in the Age of Genetic Information and Bioneurotechnology." The event was timed to coincide with Lawyer's Day and the 1993 Constitution Day of the Russian Federation. Leading experts in bioethics, biolaw, and neuroscience from universities and research centers in Novosibirsk, Tomsk, Yekaterinburg, Chelyabinsk, Krasnoyarsk, Moscow, Tyumen, Kazakhstan, and China spoke at the roundtable.
The round table was supported by the Russian Science Foundation grant No. 25-18-00338 “Anthropological bioconstitutionalism and the achievement of bioethical well-being in the system of ensuring humanitarian biosecurity: human dignity and new human rights in legal ontology and biosocial reproduction.”The grant is for three years and, in addition to the roundtable, includes interdisciplinary research into anthropological bioconstitutionalism and human biorights, as well as the publication of Russia's first scientific research encyclopedic dictionary, collective monographs, and proposals for amendments to current Russian legislation.
The round table was initiated by scientists Institute of Philosophy and Law (IPL) of NSU.
"Different sciences come to the forefront at different times. The 21st century is the century of life sciences, including, of course, biomedicine and neuroscience. Law is also a life science, no less important than medicine, because jurisprudence teaches us how to live in society, how to live while observing the laws. In my opinion, the main characteristic of the modern world is uncertainty; nothing is constant except change. In this environment of uncertainty and volatility, guidelines are essential, and in this sense, our constitution plays a crucial role, setting guidelines by which the ship called Russia can navigate. Therefore, the topic of the roundtable is particularly relevant. I am very pleased that the event generated great interest among our graduate students—we have about 60 of them, some attending in person, some online," noted Vladimir Diev, Doctor of Philosophy and Director of the NSU Institute of Physical Problems, at the opening of the event.
The project's director is Igor Kravets, Doctor of Law, Professor, Head of the Department of Constitutional and Municipal Law, and Chief Research Fellow at the Institute of Physical Problems at NSU. Speaking about the genesis of the roundtable discussion, he emphasized its interdisciplinary nature and the existence of research centers that address this issue, noting the importance of biocentrism in law, medicine, and healthcare.
"This is an interdisciplinary topic based on the development of human biorights, bioethics, and biomedicine in the context of achieving bioethical well-being. When we initiated this roundtable, we assumed that bioethics centers already exist at universities where biolaw is being developed and human rights in biomedicine are studied. Therefore, we invited colleagues from Moscow State Law University, the Center for Bioethics and Human Rights at the Ural State Law University, and the Higher School of Economics, as well as other leading specialists from Russian academic schools working on these issues," explained Igor Kravets.
The roundtable discussion included four scientific panels: Bioneuroconstitutionalism, human rights, and new technologies; Reproductive technologies, biomedicine, and human rights; Biomedical law and the status of individuals and citizens in light of new technologies (domestic and international experience); Bioethics and neurophilosophy facing the challenges of new technologies; and a youth panel.
"The topic of bioethics, the focus of this roundtable, is extremely important because significant changes in scientific knowledge are currently underway, and this is reflected in a new interdisciplinary synthesis—firstly, the sciences related to biology are merging; secondly, new technologies are emerging, primarily artificial intelligence and neural networks; and thirdly, legal science must respond to these changes. Therefore, it is crucial to approach the topic of bioethics from the perspectives of philosophy, biology, and law," commented Andrey Medushevsky, Doctor of Philosophy and Professor at the National Research University Higher School of Economics.
Elena Titova, Doctor of Law and Professor at the Law Institute of South Ural State University (Chelyabinsk), spoke at the roundtable. She discussed the relationship between the category of bioconstitutionalism and biosafety rights, as well as scientific approaches to developing this doctrine. Titova specializes in litigation involving individuals and medical organizations when rights are restricted or when it is necessary to ensure the protection of rights in the field of biomedicine.
Mikhail Kotlovsky, MD, PhD, Chief Researcher at the N.A. Semashko National Research Institute of Public Health (Moscow), focused his presentation on the ethical challenges facing professionals implementing new technologies in healthcare. The focus was on the extent to which ethical standards and ethics apply to artificial intelligence when it is used in medicine. This applies to medical research and healthcare institutions, as much data is currently generated and systematized using artificial intelligence—so-called biodata. The expert provided a comprehensive assessment of the potential of using artificial intelligence to process biodata.
Igor Kravets discussed in more detail the issue of bioethical dignity from the perspective of international and national biomedical law.
"UNESCO's international instruments provide for a law enforcement and enforcement mechanism that considers human rights in the field of biomedicine in the context of their relationship with human dignity. For example, human dignity and genetics, human dignity and biorights, human dignity and biosafety. I see this as a new paradigm. That is, bioethical dignity is not only the dignity of a person participating in medical research or exercising reproductive rights; it is the dignity of various living beings that exist on our planet and that may have various forms of vulnerability. For example, if we consider humans, these include people with disabilities, children, and pregnant women. Bioethical dignity demonstrates the degree of their autonomy and vulnerability, which should be reflected in the structure of state guarantees. Bioethics also considers the rights of animals and the ability of humans to participate in their care within the context of the dignity of living beings," explained Igor Kravets.
Continuing this theme, Irina Krylatova, PhD in Law and Director of the Center for Bioethics and Law at the V.F. Yakovlev Ural State Law University, presented her research findings. She discussed the role of bioethical principles in conceptualizing the bioethical dignity of the individual.
Vladislava Boyarinova, PhD in Law, Institute of Philosophy and Law, Novosibirsk State University, shared her thoughts on the current challenges of informed consent when collecting neurophysiological data for analysis using artificial intelligence technologies, as part of a study supported by a grant from the Russian Science Foundation.
Particular attention was paid to the application of bioethical principles in family relationships. Daria Sennikova, PhD in Law and Associate Professor at the Law Institute of the National Research Tomsk State University, presented a paper on the right to protection from violence, raising the question: how to help without harming?
Experts from other countries participated in the roundtable. Zhang Yueping, Doctor of Law, Junior Research Fellow at the Institute of Russian Language at Heilongjiang University, was a year-long intern at the Institute of Legal Philosophy at NSU. Her presentation focused on the specific understanding of biolaw in China and the status of citizens of the People's Republic of China from this perspective. Anton Didikin, Doctor of Philosophy and Candidate of Law at the Maqsut Narikbayev University Graduate School of Law (Kazakhstan), a graduate of NSU, has a long history of studying neurophilosophy and neurolaw. He presented a paper entitled "Transformation of Legal Responsibility in the Age of Neuroscience," which examined how the concept of legal capacity is changing under the influence of technological advances. This primarily concerns criminal liability, as advances in neuroscience call into question free will and the awareness of one's actions.
The field of neurophilosophy in Russia is currently most developed at one university—the Higher School of Economics. And HSE Professor Andrey Medushevsky's presentation was devoted specifically to neuroscience and its relationship with law.
"The essence of neuroscience is that it unites various fields of knowledge related to the study of the brain. And currently, some researchers are declaring a true revolution in brain research. This is linked, firstly, to the emergence of cognitive sciences and psychology. Secondly, it's biology, bioethics, and artificial intelligence. This revolution in brain research lies in the emergence, for the first time, of technologies that allow us to track the processes of cognition, meaning formation, and thought. And the most important of these technologies is, without a doubt, cerebral cortex scanning. Humanity is gaining a unique opportunity to empirically study subjective states," commented Andrey Medushevsky.
Lawyers face new challenges: firstly, a whole new field of legal research related to neurolaw is emerging; secondly, the question arises of how to approach these technological advances from a legal perspective, in particular the legality of using neuroevidence in court.
The presentations by experts in the field of reproductive technologies from the perspective of both biolaw and public health generated great interest.
Valentina Komarova, Doctor of Law and Professor at the Kutafin Moscow State Law University, addressed the highly specific issue of the relationship and safeguarding of private and public interests in the use of reproductive technologies.
Andrey Kondrashev, Doctor of Law and Professor at the Law Institute of the Siberian Federal University (Krasnoyarsk), spoke online about the problems of regulating the post-mortem use of reproductive technologies in Russia (with comparative aspects).
Ekaterina Abrosimova, PhD in Law and Associate Professor at MGIMO University (Acting Head of the Department of Innovative Jurisprudence and Information Law), spoke online about the issue of the private legal status/regime of cryopreserved embryos.
Evgeniya Mossberg, a junior researcher at the Institute of Philosophy and Law at Novosibirsk State University, shared the results of her research (both under a grant from the Russian Science Foundation and for her dissertation) on the topic "Cryopreservation of human germ cells and embryos as a way to ensure human reproductive rights in the post-COVID period: the experience of BRICS countries."
Also of interest was the youth panel, which featured presentations by graduate students from the NSU Institute of Philosophy and Law. Maria Solodkina (Igoshkina), who has been working on information technology in constitutional law for over a year, presented a paper on the impact of information and digital technologies on the legal regulation of bioinformatics and biodata security. This is one of the issues related to the digitalization of healthcare.
Vitaly Kamorny, a civil law specialist by training, is interested in the issues of liability for harm caused by artificial intelligence in the fields of biolaw and biotechnology. It's possible that his research will expand to include exploring how artificial intelligence influences the development of biolaw.
Ivan Kuzmenkin is writing a dissertation on genetic constitution, which is related to international biolaw and the development of rights in Russia regarding genetic information. Genetic constitution, broadly defined, is a set of rights to the preservation and use of genetic information. The topic of his presentation at the roundtable was "Implementation of the Constitutional Principle of Human Dignity in Human Cloning," and human cloning is precisely part of the realization of rights to bioengineering and genetic constitution.
Roundtable participants expressed a commitment to scientific communication on complex issues of biolaw, biomedicine, neuroscience, and healthcare, and demonstrated the importance and potential of an interdisciplinary approach.
Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source. It represents an accurate account of the source's assertions and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
