Chilean Supreme Court ruling on the protection of brain activity: neurorights, personal data protection, and neurodata.

This paper discusses a landmark ruling by the Chilean Supreme Court of August 9, 2023 dealing with the right to mental privacy, originated with an action for constitutional protection filed on behalf of Guido Girardi Lavin against Emotiv Inc., a North American company based in San Francisco, California that is commercializing the device "Insight." This wireless device functions as a headset with sensors that collect information about the brain's electrical activity (i.e., neurodata). The discussion revolves around whether neurodata can be considered personal data and whether they could be classified into a special category. The application of the present legislation on data (the most obsolete, such as the Chilean law, and the most recent EU law) does not seem adequate to protect neurodata. The use of neurodata raises ethical and legal concerns that are not fully addressed by current regulations on personal data protection. Despite not being necessarily considered personal data, neurodata represent the most intimate aspects of human personality and should be protected in light of potential new risks. The unique characteristics of neurodata, including their interpretive nature and potential for revealing thoughts and intentions, pose challenges for regulation. Current data protection laws do not differentiate between different types of data based on their informational content, which is relevant for protecting individual rights. The development of new technologies involving neurodata requires particular attention and careful consideration to prevent possible harm to human dignity. The regulation of neurodata must account for their specific characteristics and the potential risks they pose to privacy, confidentiality, and individual rights. The answer lies in the reconfiguration of human rights known as "neurorights" that goes beyond the protection of personal data.

On pharmacological neuroenhancement as part of the new neurorights' pioneering legislation in Chile: a perspective.

The so-called neurorights are emerging human rights, or rather reconfigurations of already existing human rights, seeking to address the impact of the possible misuse of neurotechnologies, which have the potential to become more invasive and harmful in the future if not regulated. The aim of specifying neurorights is to protect the dignity and autonomy of the individual in the face of neurotechnological advances. Recently, Chile proposed a Constitutional reform inspired by the neurorights, opening a debate. One of the proposed neurorights is fair and equitable access to cognitive enhancement, which will be the specific object of this perspective article. Starting from the legal proposal, we analyse and discuss some perspectives on cognitive enhancement, or "neuroenhancement", which could be considered as part of enhancement neurotechnologies, pointing out that pharmacological enhancers, or "smart drugs", might be considered as part of these enhancers. We present a classification of the different types of cognitive enhancements as it has been proposed in the literature, into which pharmacological cognitive enhancement can be included, concluding that there is currently no agreement amongst scholars and lawyers about the ethical consideration of pharmacological cognitive enhancement. We therefore argue that it is necessary for the legislator to explicitly address the issue in the proposed regulations, in order to take a clear position on the topic, as it has been done in the United Kingdom, where the pharmacological neuroenhancers have been explicitly excluded from the regulation. If pharmacological neuroenhancers are going to be considered neurotechnologies, then new law proposals should seek harmonization with the already existing legislation regulating pharmacological health and consumer rights (both globally, taking into account international drug laws, and locally, according to each country's internal regulations) and of course, with the whole system of fundamental rights. Finally, we briefly discuss the ethical problem of equitable access to this new type of neurotechnologies (as part of the neurorights) and leave the debate open for new insights from the scientific community on the possible consequences of including (or not) pharmacological neuroenhancers as neurotechnologies for cognitive enhancement in the framework of the ethical and legal debate.

Biobancos. Desafíos en la protección de datos de muestras almacenadas con fines de investigación biomédica. Perspectiva chilena a la luz del Acuerdo Transpacífico de Libre Comercio (TPP) / No disponible

Los biobancos son una manifestación moderna de almacenamiento de recursos biológicos. Aquellas muestras humanas destinadas a la investigación científica, poseen características especiales, debido a que las muestras contienen información genética confidencial de los donantes. Esta investigación, pretende mostrar cuáles son los desafíos en materia regulatoria en Chile, tanto en la obtención como almacenamiento de muestras con fines de investigación biomédica y los derechos fundamentales de los donantes involucrados a la luz del Acuerdo Transpacífico de Libre Comercio (TPP)

Biobanks are a modern manifestation of storage of biological resources. Those human samples for scientific research, have special characteristics, because the samples contain confidential genetic information from donors. This research aims to show what challenges does existing in regulatory matters in Chile in the collection and storage of samples for biomedical research and the fundamental rights of donors involved, according to Transpacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)

Implicancias étccas y jurídicas en el desarroll de la biotecnología transgénicca: reflexiones en torno a la tramitación de la ley de obtentores vegetales en Chile / Ethical and lgall implications of the development of transgenc biotechnologyy: reflections on the transaction of the law of vegetable breeders in Chile / Implicções éticaas e jrídicas no desenvolvimento da biotecnologia traansgênica: reflexões ao redor a tramitação da lei de obtentores vegetais no Chile

Recientemente ha sido aprobada por la Cámara de Diputados en Chile la tramitación de la Ley de Obtentores Vegetales (Ley Monsanto). Esta investigación pretende un análisis analítico, crítico e interpretativo de un proyecto de ley que debiera seguir ciertos parámetros éticos. Los derechos de obtentores vegetales son un sistema de propiedad intelectual para la protección específica de nuevas variedades de plantas. Para que una variedad pueda ser protegida, debe ser nueva, distinta, uniforme y estable. Los derechos de obtentor se rigen bajo la Unión Internacional para la Protección de las Obtenciones Vegetales (UPOV). Chile ha adherido a UPOV en acta 1978 en 1996, y lo implementa mediante la Ley de Obtentores de Nuevas Variedades Vegetales, No. 19.342 de 1994. Sin embargo, Chile firmó un acuerdo de Libre Comercio con Estados Unidos, donde se compromete a incorporarse a la versión de UPOV 1991. Esta iniciativa ha causado gran resquemor en la sociedad civil chilena y en el mundo político. Grandes son también las aristas éticas en torno a esta iniciativa, desde que la normativa privatizaría las semillas y concentraría la propiedad de estas en pocas empresas, entre las cuales se presumen intereses económicos de Monsanto. Además, el proyecto de ley estaría violando el convenio 169 de la Organización Internacional del Trabajo (OIT) sobre biodiversidad. Por otro lado, en Chile no existe un catastro de recursos "fitogenéticos" adecuado. Respeto a la discusión bioética, esta normativa no considera reflexiones en torno a los principios de precaución, solidaridad, multiculturalidad, responsabilidad y sustentabilidad con el medio ambiente en el contexto global. Consideramos que una adecuada legislación en torno a los transgénicos puede sin duda ayudar al progreso con equidad.

Recently, the Congress Chamber in Chile has approved the legal procedure for the law of protection of new varieties of plants, colloquially named Monsanto Law. The rights of plant breeders are a system of intellectual property for specific protection of new varieties of plants. For a variety to be protected, it must be new, different, uniform and stable. The rights of breeders are ruled under the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV). Chile has adhered to UPOV act 1978 in 1996 and has been implemented by the law of New Plant Varieties Breeders Nº 19.342 of 1994. Nevertheless, Chile signed a free-trade agreement with the United States since January 1, 2004 compromising to incorporate UPOV 1991. This legal initiative has caused some fear in Chilean civil society and the political world. Great are also the ethical edges around this initiative, since the normative will privatize the seeds and concentrates the property in a few companies, assuming economic interests by Monsanto multinational. Furthermore, the project law would be violating the agreement 169 by the International Work Organization (IWO) about biodiversity. On the other hand, there is no adequate registry for "plant genetic" resources in Chile. Referring to ethical discussion, we can point put that this normative do not consider reflections about the principles of precaution, solidarity, responsibility and sustainability with the environment. Furthermore, an adequate legislation about transgenic organisms may without doubt help to progress with equity.

Foi recentemente aprovada pela Câmara dos Deputados do Chile a tramitação da lei de Obtentores Vegetais (Lei Monsanto). Esta pesquisa busca uma análise analítica, crítica e interpretativa de um projeto de lei que deveria seguir certas normas éticas. Os direitos dos obtentores vegetais são um sistema da propriedade intelectual para a proteção específica de novas variedades vegetais. Para que uma variedade pudera ser protegida, que deve ser nova, distinta, uniforme e estável. Os direitos do obtentor são regidos pela União Internacional para a Proteção das Obtenções Vegetais (UPOV). Chile aderiu à UPOV em acta 1978, em 1996, e implementada pela Lei de Obtentores de Novas Variedades Vegetais, No. 19,342 de 1994. No entanto, Chile assina um acordo de Livre Comércio com os Estados Unidos, onde ele concorda em se juntar a versão do UPOV de 1991. Esta iniciativa tem causado grande ressentimento na sociedade civil chilena e no mundo político. Grandes também são as bordas éticas em torno desta iniciativa, uma vez que as normas privatizam as sementes e concentram a propriedade desses em poucas empresas, entre as quais se presumem interesses econômicos da Monsanto. Além disso, o projeto de lei violaria o convenia 169 da Organização Internacional do Trabalho (OIT) sobre a biodiversidade. Por outro lado, no Chile não existe um cadastro de recursos "fito genéticos" adequado. Respeito ao debate bioético, esta legislação não considera reflexões sobre o princípio da precaução, solidariedade, multiculturalismo, responsabilidade e sustentabilidade com o meio ambiente no contexto global. Consideramos que uma legislação adequada sobre os transgênicos pode certamente ajudar a o progresso com equidade.

Naturaleza jurídica de las Declaraciones Internacionales sobre Bioética / Legal nature of International Bioethical Regulations

Para los juristas resulta imprescindible establecer la naturaleza jurídica de las instituciones que investigan, toda vez que de ellas se derivan una serie de efectos jurídicos inequívocos que le son propios. En esta línea, las declaraciones bioéticas, al no poseer estatuto jurídico de Tratados Internacionales, resulta válido indagar acerca de su verdadera eficacia. Para lo cual es necesario determinar previamente su naturaleza jurídica. En este trabajo se intenta dilucidar si es posible considerar a las declaraciones bioéticas como principios generales del derecho y qué efectos supondría adscribir esta tesis en los ordenamientos jurídicos internos (AU)

For lawyers it is essential to establish the legal nature of the institutions that they investigate, since there are many legal effects that derive from it. In this line, most bioethical declarations do not have the status of international treaties, and it is valid to inquire about their true effectiveness. In order to do this it is necessary determine their legal nature. This paper attempts to establish whether it is possible to consider bioethical declarations as general principles of law and what is the effectiveness of supporting this thesis within domestic legal system (AU)