A/HRC/48/Add.xx social media exploitation capabilities for the purposes of scrutinizing visa applicants and visa holders before and after they arrive in the U.S. 172 Submissions also raised concerns about the US government’s consideration of technologies whose goal was “determinations via automation” regarding whether an individual applying for or holding a US visa was likely to become a “positively contributing member of society” or intended “to commit criminal or terrorist attacks.”173 One submission noted in particular the use in the US of risk assessments tools in immigration detention decisions, including one using an algorithm set to always recommend immigration detention, regardless of an individual’s criminal history. 174 59. All this points to a trend in immigration surveillance, where predictive models use artificial intelligence to forecast whether people with no ties to criminal activity will nonetheless commit crimes in the future. Yet these predictive models are prone to creating and reproducing racially discriminatory feedback loops.175 Furthermore, racial bias is already present in the datasets on which these models rely.176 When discriminatory datasets are treated as neutral inputs, they lead to inaccurate models of criminality which then “perpetuate racial inequality and contribute to the targeting and over-policing of non-citizens.”177 60. The response to the COVID-19 pandemic has led to the rapid increase in “biosurveillance”—the monitoring of an entire population’s health and behaviour on an unprecedented scale, facilitated by emerging digital technologies.178 As States increasingly move toward a bio-surveillance system to combat the pandemic, there has been an increase in the use of digital tracking, automated drones, and other technologies “purporting to help manage migration and stop the spread of the virus.”179 There is an outsize risk that these technologies will enable further discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity and citizenship status.180 IV. Recommendations 61. The Special Rapporteur recalls her previous report to the Human Rights Council and reminds Members States of the applicable international human rights obligations, in particular: (a) The scope of legally prohibited racial discrimination in the design and use of emerging digital technologies; (b) Obligations to prevent and combat racial discrimination in the design and use of emerging digital technologies; and (c) (Obligations to provide effective remedies for racial discrimination in the design and use of emerging digital technologies. 62. The Special Rapporteur reiterates the analysis and recommendations in her previous report regarding the obligations of States and non-State actors and urges States to consider them alongside the recommendations included herein. In the specific context of border and immigration enforcement, she recommends that Member States: 63. Address the racist and xenophobic ideologies and structures that have increasingly shaped border and immigration enforcement and administration. The effects of technology are in significant part a product of the underlying social, political and economic forces driving the design and use of technology. Without a fundamental shift away from racist, xenophobic, anti-migrant, anti-stateless and anti-refugee 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 Mijente, Submission citing https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/02/magazine/ice-surveillancedeportation.html. Ibid. MRG, Submission. Mijente, Submission. Ibid. Ibid. https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/2020/03/rise-bio-surveillance-state. https://edri.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Technological-Testing-Grounds.pdf. Ibid. 19