Thursday, September 05, 2024

 AMERIKA

Millions of seniors can't afford their prescription medications: Study

About 4% of seniors can't afford their prescription at all, the study found.


September 5, 2024,

Millions of American seniors are having a hard time affording their prescription medications, a new National Health Statistics report suggests.

The study, published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, found that approximately 4% of those aged 65 and older can't afford their prescription at all, and more than 3% of them skipped doses, delayed filling a prescription or took less medication than prescribed to cut back on costs.

"Older adults that were food insecure were six times more likely to not get their prescription medication," Robin A. Cohen, study co-author and statistician with the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics, said.

Dr. Lalita Abhyankar, a family medicine physician based in San Francisco, told ABC News she often sees patients struggling to pay for their medications.

One of Abhyankar's patients with diabetes couldn't afford his monthly dose of insulin, so "he would ration out his insulin," she said. Despite being on both Medicaid and Medicare, "the copay was challenging for him to do on a month-to-month basis," she noted.

Senior female pensioner sitting at table reading the medical report and medicine drug prescription.
Adobe Stock

Abhyankar has also seen this problem when patients needed an expensive medication because cheaper alternatives haven't worked.

"I've seen them do half a dose or take it once a day instead of the recommended twice or three times a day and then continue to walk around with uncontrolled high blood pressure," Abhyankar said. "That increases their risk of stroke, heart attack, damage to the eyes and kidneys."

She went on, "The downstream effects are going to be that we're going to see more patients in hospitals, and emergency rooms. That puts a huge burden on the healthcare system."

Generally, adults aged 65 and older qualify for universal health care under Medicare. That covers medical needs such as doctors' visits and hospital stays.

Medications aren't automatically included. Older adults must enroll in Medicare Part D, a separate prescription drug coverage plan, or a private insurance plan that helps pay fomedications.

Even when they are covered, most Americans will still owe some amount for copays and premiums. When the expenses pile up, some choose to forego any coverage at all.

Abhyankar said there are ways to reduce the cost of prescriptions including websites such as GoodRx that can offer coupons for customers sometimes at lower prices. Another option is the online discount pharmacy Cost Plus Drugs, which has hundreds of medications available for purchase at lower prices.

Abhyankar also suggested that patients try insurance preferred pharmacy programs, which are pharmacies that have an agreement with an insurance plan to charge less to fill prescriptions.

Last month, the Biden administration announced an agreement with drug companies to lower the price of 10 prescription medications for people with Medicare Part D. The negotiated prices will go into effect on Jan. 1, 2026.

Roshan Nebhrajani Bransden, MD, is a family medicine resident physician and a member of the ABC News Medical Unit.





Israeli displacement of Palestinians to Jordan will be act of war: Amman

Jordan is preparing a legal file on Israeli incursions into holy sites in occupied Jerusalem, says the country's top diplomat.




AFP

The Jordanian foreign minister emphasises that his country would not send soldiers anywhere "to become targets in an unresolved conflict." / Photo: AFP

Jordan has warned that any attempt by Israel to displace Palestinians to Jordanian territory would be considered a "declaration of war."

The warning came on Thursday during a news conference by Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi with his German counterpart, Annalena Baerbock, who is currently visiting Jordan as part of a regional tour.

Safadi said Jordan is preparing a legal file on Israeli incursions into holy sites in occupied Jerusalem, though he did not specify to which entity this file would be submitted.

He urged the international community to act before the situation ignites in the occupied West Bank and the region.

Safadi said: "Israel is waging another war," in reference to Israel's escalation in the occupied West Bank.

"(Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu and his government are pushing towards an explosion of the situation in the entire region.”

"Israeli actions on the ground have killed all opportunities for achieving a just peace," according to Safadi, who said that "stopping the aggression on Gaza and the escalation in the (occupied) West Bank" is "the first step to prevent the situation in the region from worsening further."



Playing a role in Gaza?

Safadi affirmed Jordan’s support for a hostage swap deal, accusing Netanyahu of obstructing its completion because the Israeli prime minister has "changed his positions and withdrew from his commitments."

On the possibility of Jordan playing a role in Gaza "the day after" the onslaught ends, Safadi clarified that all approaches are “purely security-related” and "have no chance of success,” he went on.

The Jordanian foreign minister emphasised that his country would not send soldiers anywhere "to become targets in an unresolved conflict."

The Israeli army launched its largest military operation in the northern West Bank in two decades on Aug. 28, killing at least 39 Palestinians and causing massive destruction in the area.

Tension has been running high across the occupied West Bank as Israel pressed ahead with its brutal onslaught on Gaza, which has killed more than 40,800 Palestinians, mostly women and children, since October 7.

At least 691 people have since been killed and more than 5,700 injured by Israeli fire in the West Bank, according to the Health Ministry.


SOURCE: TRTWorld and agencies


Ten peace organizations in Georgia are voluntarily registering as "foreign agents." Why?

Further Sanctions to Degrade Russia’s Ability to Operationalize the Arctic LNG 2 Project


Press Statement

Matthew Miller, 
DOD
Department Spokesperson

September 5, 2024


In response to Russia’s continued war of aggression against Ukraine, the United States is imposing further costs on those supporting Russia’s war effort and attempting to expand Russia’s global energy leverage.

In today’s actions, the Department of State is targeting two entities and two vessels connected to attempts to export liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the U.S.-sanctioned Arctic LNG 2 project. The Department is sanctioning Gotik Energy Shipping Co (Gotik) and Plio Energy Cargo Shipping OPC PVT LTD (Plio Energy). Gotik and Plio Energy are the registered owner and commercial manager, respectively, of the LNG carrier (LNG/C) New Energy. LNG/C New Energy used deceptive shipping practices, including shutting off its automatic identification system, to load cargo from the U.S.-sanctioned Arctic LNG 2 project via a ship-to-ship transfer on August 25, 2024, with LNG/C Pioneer, a vessel blocked by the United States on August 23, 2024. We are also identifying one additional vessel managed and operated by Plio Energy, LNG/C Mulan, as property in which Plio Energy has an interest.

The U.S. government will continue to answer attempts to operationalize the sanctioned Arctic LNG 2 project or otherwise expand Russia’s energy capabilities with a swift response. Working alongside our G7 partners and other allies, we will remain steadfast in countering Russia’s exploitation of its energy resources for political gain.

Gotik and Plio Energy are being designated pursuant to Section 1(a)(vi)(B) of E.O. 14024, as amended, for having materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, Limited Liability Company Arctic LNG 2, a person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to E.O. 14024. New Energy (IMO 9324277) is being identified as property in which Gotik has an interest, and Mulan (IMO 9864837) is being identified as property in which Plio Energy has an interest.


Vicious cycle of climate change, wildfires, air pollution have 'spiraling negative impact' on planet: Report

'Ambient air pollution causes more than 4.5M premature deaths annually and wreaks a high economic and environmental cost,’ says World Meteorological Organization

Burak Bir |05.09.2024 - Update : 05.09.2024


LONDON

A vicious cycle of climate change, wildfires and air pollution is having a “spiraling negative impact” on human health, ecosystems and agriculture, said a report released Thursday by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO).

The report, titled Air Quality and Climate Bulletin, detailed the negative impact of climate change and air pollution on the environment and human health.

"Ambient air pollution causes more than 4.5 million premature deaths annually and wreaks a high economic and environmental cost," said the report, the fourth in an annual series, that explores the intricate relationship between air quality and climate.

“The chemical species that lead to a degradation in air quality are normally co-emitted with greenhouse gases. Thus, changes in one inevitably cause changes in the other,” it added.

WMO Deputy-Secretary-General Ko Barrett underlined that climate change and air quality cannot be treated separately as they go hand-in-hand and must be tackled together.

"It would be a win-win situation for the health of our planet, its people and our economies, to recognize the inter-relationship and act accordingly," she said.

Pointing out that intense heat and persistent droughts are fueling the risk of wildfires and air pollution, Barrett said that climate change means that we face this scenario with “increasing frequency.”

“Interdisciplinary science and research is key to finding solutions," she added.
Why Canadian politics just got more unpredictable

Nadine Yousif
BBC News, Toronto
Getty Images
Canadians could soon decide if they want to keep Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in power

Canada’s politics got a dose of uncertainty this week after the country’s left-leaning New Democratic Party (NDP) backed away from a deal that helped keep Justin Trudeau’s Liberals in power.

The deal - called a "supply and confidence" agreement - had the NDP backing Mr Trudeau's minority government in confidence votes in exchange for support on key priorities.

The sudden collapse of the deal means an early federal election is more likely.

But NDP leader Jagmeet Singh on Thursday refused to say whether his party would seek to bring down the government at the earliest opportunity.


"We are absolutely aware ripping up this agreement makes an election more likely," Mr Singh, whose party is ranked fourth in the House of Commons, said at a press conference.

"Whenever an election comes we’ll be ready to fight it."

But he added: “We’ll have to look at each vote on its merits and decide what’s in the interests of Canadians.”

The NDP-Liberal deal was originally meant to run until June 2025, with the next general election scheduled for October of that year.

The government is now in a shakier position and could be brought down if the Liberals fail to survive any non-confidence motions put forward after parliament returns in mid-September.

The NDP-Liberal pact was not a formal coalition but had the NDP supporting the government in exchange for movement on policies like a dental benefits programme for lower-income families and a national pharmacare programme that would cover birth control and insulin.

Until this spring, Mr Singh and senior members of his party remained publicly committed to the deal, and its collapse this week was a surprise.

But there is likely some strategy behind the decision, Laura Stephenson, a professor of political science at Western University in London, Ontario, told the BBC.

With two by-elections coming up in Montreal and Winnipeg on 16 September, Prof Stephenson said the NDP is likely trying to distance itself in the minds of voters from the Liberals, who have been polling poorly.

“If the NDP wants to be seen as an alternative to the Liberals, they also need to distinguish themselves from the Liberals,” Prof Stephenson said.

But she noted the NDP is not operating from a position of strength and likely does not want an election soon.

“People are sick and tired of the Liberals and they're looking to find an alternative, but we aren't seeing the numbers translating into gains for the NDP,” she said.

An August poll of Canadian voters by Abacus Data suggested that 42% would vote for the Conservatives, who are currently the official opposition. Around 25% would vote for the Liberals, and 18% for the NDP.

Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre had called for the NDP to end the deal and help his party force an early election.

A majority of members of parliament are needed for that to happen and Prof Stephenson anticipates Canadians will not go to the polls until March or April of next year, when the Liberals table the upcoming budget bill.

Because it is a key piece of legislation, a vote on the budget can double as an expression of confidence in a sitting government.

Prof Stephenson cautions, however, that with politics, anything could happen.
Russians mock US election allegations as Putin teasingly says he supports Harris

Russian commentators are mocking allegations that Moscow is meddling again in the U.S. presidential election, while President Vladimir Putin appeared to bolster the teasing tone by wryly claiming he supported Vice President Kamala Harris


ByEMMA BURROWS
 Associated Press
September 5, 2024


Russian commentators on Thursday mocked allegations that Moscow was meddling again in the U.S. presidential election, and President Vladimir Putin appeared to bolster the teasing tone by wryly claiming he supported Vice President Kamala Harris.

On Wednesday, the U.S. Justice Department said the Russian state-owned broadcaster RT is carrying out a covert campaign to influence the American public ahead of the election. Two state media employees were charged, and 10 people and two entities were sanctioned, with Kremlin-run websites seized.

The Justice Department did not identify which candidate the propaganda campaign was meant to boost. But internal strategy notes from participants in the effort released by the Justice Department make clear that former President Donald Trump was the intended beneficiary, even though the candidates' names were blacked out.

The Kremlin has dismissed previous allegations of interference in U.S. elections, from 2016 and onward, as nonsense. A Foreign Ministry spokesperson vowed to retaliate against U.S. media in Russia.

Margarita Simonyan, head of the state-run broadcaster RT who was sanctioned by the U.S. in the latest allegations, shared a social media post Thursday in which the outlet hit back by saying, "They called from 2016 and want all their tired cliches back.”

The Treasury Department described Simonyan as a “central figure in Russian government malign influence efforts.”

Putin, who was in the Russian Far East port of Vladivostok for an economic forum, did not address the latest U.S. allegations, but he did comment on the election, in which Harris is the Democratic Party’s nominee after President Joe Biden dropped his bid for reelection.

“We had the current president, Mr. Biden, as our favorite but he was taken out of the race. He recommended all his supporters back Mrs. Harris, so we will too,” Putin said with a wry smile and an arched eyebrow.

Harris, he said, has an “expressive and infectious laugh,” which shows “she’s doing well.”

If Harris is doing well, then “perhaps she will refrain” from imposing more sanctions on Russia, Putin said. Some members of the audience were pictured laughing at his remarks.


Putin authorized influence operations to help Trump in the 2020 election, while his 2016 campaign benefited from hacking by Russian intelligence officers and a covert social media effort, according to U.S. law enforcement and intelligence officials.

Before winning in 2016, Putin praised Trump as “outstanding” and “talented."

Earlier this year, Putin suggested that Biden's reelection would be better for Russia as he is “more experienced” and “predictable.”

U.S. intelligence officials maintain that Moscow still has a preference for Trump, who has praised Putin and has suggested cutting aid to Ukraine.

Although RT's Simonyan shared posts disparaging the U.S. allegations, earlier this year she appeared on a Russian talk show and discussed how RT was involved in “info wars,” pumping out pro-Kremlin narratives in the U.S.

“We create many sources of information that are not tied to us,” Simonyan said, suggesting to the host that she shouldn’t publicly discuss RT's covert work.

“While the CIA tries to figure out that they’re tied to us, they already have an enormous audience. Sometimes they find them and close them down. ... While they’re shutting them down we’ve already created new ones,” she said.

RT and the CIA “chase each other” in a game of cat and mouse, she said.

“It’s actually fun,” Simonyan added with a laugh.

In Vladivostok, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said authorities would take “retaliatory measures” against U.S. media in Russia in response to the U.S. actions.

She said the Justice Department's moves contradict U.S. obligations to ensure “free access to information and media pluralism.”

Russia, meanwhile, is pursuing an increasingly harsh crackdown on independent journalists, activists and ordinary citizens, suffocating any free expression inside the country.
Explainer: How ‘Ten Days of Rage’ Shook Nigeria

Features
Chickenonline / Pixabay

Emma Burns | U. Auckland Law School
SEPTEMBER 4, 2024 05:

For the past few weeks, Nigeria has been rocked by protests over a cost-of-living crisis. The organised protests built off the momentum of anti-corruption protests in Uganda and demonstrations in Kenya against increased tax on essential goods. Like its predecessors, the protests in Nigeria have been characterised by violence, destruction of property, and allegations of human rights violations at the hands of the government. Following Nigerian President Bola Tinubu’s unheeded calls to stop the protests, authorities instigated a crackdown on protestors that sparked outrage among human rights organisations. So, why did the protests come about and how did everything get so out of hand?

What are the protests about?

The protests, dubbed “ten days of rage,” were a product of worsening poverty, food insecurity and allegations of political corruption. Nigeria is currently experiencing its worst economic crisis in 30 years. A report by the WHO entitled “Global Report on Food Crises 2024,” listed Nigeria as one of five countries with the largest number of people facing high levels of acute food insecurity.

The planned protests, coordinated through digital activism over social media and championed by numerous civil organisations under the hashtag #EndBadGovernanceinNigeria, are a call for recognition of economic hardship and systemic corruption that has grown deep roots in the West African state. Rallied to the cause were organized groups such as Students for Change, Nigerians Against Corruption Initiative, Nigerians Against Hunger and the Take it Back Movement, among others.

The protestors organized around ten core demands concerning:Insecurity and Hunger;
The immediate Release for #EndSARS Victims;
INEC and electoral Reform;
Governance accountability;
Recovery of stolen funds;
Implementation of a living wage and standard of living;
Judicial, legislative and constitutional reforms;
Comprehensive infrastructural development;
Transition to a unicameral legislature; and
Education and human capital development.

In many ways, the protests were a push-back against the economic reforms of the Bola Tinubu administration. In spite of the administration’s reforms, Nigeria’s inflation rate hit 34.19 percent in June. The reforms have devaluated the Naira (Nigeria’s currency), eliminated fuel and energy subsidies, and borne witness to a sharp increase in food prices. A report by the IMF showed real GDP growth slowed to 2.8 percent in 2023; agriculture and trade were weak, and the Naira depreciated sharply after the unification of the official foreign exchange windows in June 2023. The removal of fuel subsidies in May 2023 worsened hardship and has been an ongoing cause for discontent.

Most notably, the reforms resulted in a tug-of-war to lift minimum wages above 30,000 Naira ($20,02) per month. When the Nigerian government refused to budge, flights were disrupted or suspended, and the national power grid was completely shut down. Nigeria’s two biggest labour unions, the Nigerian Labour Congress and the Trade Union Congress, would eventually pause their strikes pending the government’s promise of more meaningful negotiations. While the Nigerian Minister of Information had announced an agreement on a monthly minimum wage of N70,000 ($44), disgruntlement remained—the N70,000 figure was far below the unions’ initial demand for N494,000 ($329.60).

The protests were also the product of allegations of political corruption. In July, Nigeria’s Federal High Court in Abuja ordered the Independent Electoral Commission to prosecute involvement with electoral violence, bribery, vote buying and collusion that overshadowed the 2023 general elections

What happened during the protests?

On July 29, the same day the National Minimum Wage Bill was assented to, protestors took to the streets to block a highway to the Nigerian capital, Abuja.

On July 31, the Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, issued a statement urging all groups planning to participate in the protest to submit their details to the commissioners of police in their respective states. Lamenting that the organisers had not done so, Egbetokun claimed that intelligence showed the protests were aimed at “unleashing mayhem” that threatened to throw the situation into a state of anarchy. Ahead of the demonstrations, Amnesty International called on Nigerian authorities to protect the right to peaceful protest.

Egebtokun’s concerns were not initially realised. On the first official day of the marches, August 1, protests began peacefully through Nigerian states accompanied by signs and chants. The protests soon escalated: reports would arise that the Nigeria Police Force shot tear gas and live bullets at protestors in Abuja in an attempt to disperse them.

On August 2, Amnesty International reported 13 deaths of peaceful protesters. A curfew was declared in multiple states, prohibiting protestors from demonstrating. A police statement cited widespread destruction including destruction of police stations, attempts to take over government houses, looting and other such destruction of property. Amnesty International would criticise the crackdown on protestors, indiscriminate shooting into crowds, and attempts to hire thugs to hijack the protests.

On August 4, the police arbitrarily arrested 81 youth protestors in Sokoto state. Amnesty International called for an investigation into the deaths of 10 peaceful hunger protestors in Kano, some of whom, according to their sources, were children chanting “peace.”

As the protests progressed, many of the leaders were arrested. On August 6, over 40 were arrested for waving the Russian flag. By August 7, over 1,000 people had been remanded over the protest. To round off the ten days, the Take it Back Movement, a leading organizer of the protest, scheduled a One-Million-Man demonstration across all 36 states for August 10.

How has President Bola Tinubu responded to the protests?

President Bola Tinubu broke his silence on August 4, calling for an end to protests during an address to the nation, saying, “Our government will not stand idly by and allow a few with a clear political agenda to tear this nation apart.” He expressed a desire for dialogue and sadness over the lives lost:


As your President, I am committed to ensuring public order and protecting the lives and property of every Nigerian. We must come together, suspending further protests, and embrace dialogue for the sake of our nation’s unity and progress.

While Tinubu stressed the scarcity of resources, in the face of the cost of living crisis, he claimed, “[O]ur government is making significant strides”. He went on to cite reduced debt services and major infrastructure initiatives to improve quality of life. He confirmed that the government had ordered the suspension of duties on critical food items and medical supplies for the next six months. Tinubu also confirmed the purchase of tractors and planting equipment from overseas to kickstart the agriculture industry.

On August 8, Tinubu addressed the nation again to reassure against what he described as “temporary pains,” saying “every effort is being made to ensure a stable and prosperous future for all Nigerians.” Tinubu said:


All our good and helpful plans are in the works. More importantly, I know that they will work. Sadly, there was an unavoidable lag between subsidy removal and these plans coming fully online. However, we are swiftly closing the time gap.

Tinubu assured that the government would fulfil its promise to make education more affordable and provide loans to higher education students under the “Renewed Hope Agenda.” He also expressed plans to open up 1.4 million jobs through a revamp of the cotton and textile industry and to deploy ten thousand “agro rangers” to 19 states for farmers and farmland protection.

Why has the government’s response garnered criticism?

Despite the government’s promise that Nigeria will soon overcome the “temporary pains” of the administration’s economic reforms, the government remains under pressure from protestors and international organizations.

The African Charter provides for the right to freedom of assembly and association as well as the right to property. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 similarly provides for the right to freedom of expression and the press; the right to peaceful assembly and association, and the right to property. Nigeria is also a party to the ICCPR.

In light of the above commitments, the government has faced criticism for using excessive force against protestors and opposition leaders. The official response to the protests has created flashbacks to the #EndSARS protests, which arose following the death of a Nigerian man at the hands of the NPG unit Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS). The government considered the SARS protests to be unlawful and denied all claims that the police shot at protestors. A ruling by the Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) last month held that Nigeria violated the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights in its response to the #EndSARS protests.

Further to these complaints, Human Rights Watch has described the government’s framing of protestors as unwarranted and sinister. “Rather than undermining the right to protest, authorities should address the underlying issues that are driving the protests. They should ensure that protests can occur safely and peacefully and people’s fundamental rights are respected,” the organization said.

Conclusion

The protests are a lesson in the power of organized protests and the balancing act required of states to protect the rights to freedom of speech and assembly while upholding the equally important rights to health and property. Amnesty International’s Nigeria Director, Isa Sanusi has advised that the “Nigerian authorities must begin to seriously address the underlying issues driving the protests instead of ramping up repression and stifling peaceful dissent.”

While we await the next chapter with hopes that economic reforms will prove fruitful and that legal accountability for the countless deaths of protestors will be delivered, the Executive Directors at IMF have issued various recommendations to the Tinubu administration. The Directors encouraged all-encompassing reforms to reinforce the resilience of Nigeria’s economy. The Directors also stressed the need for “steadfast, well-sequenced and well-communicated reforms.” They warned that further adverse shocks to food and oil would exacerbate inflation and pressure on the exchange rate.

The likelihood of civil unrest is certainly high if the pains of the economic crisis do not prove to be “temporary” as Tinubu describes.

Council of Europe opens world’s first global AI treaty for signature
Council of Europe opens world’s first global AI treaty for signature


The Council of Europe opened the world’s first legally binding global treaty on artificial intelligence (AI) for signature on Thursday. Unveiled at a conference in Vilnius, Lithuania, this historic treaty sets a new international standard by ensuring that AI systems align with human rights, democratic values, and the rule of law.

Formally known as the Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy, and the Rule of Law (CETS No. 225), the treaty marks a pivotal moment in global AI regulation. It represents the first international agreement on AI governance and has been signed by the European Union (EU), the UK, the US, Israel, Andorra, Georgia, Iceland, Norway, the Republic of Moldova, and San Marino. Adopted by the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers on May 17, 2024, the treaty establishes a comprehensive legal framework covering the entire lifecycle of AI systems, from design and development to deployment and decommissioning. It addresses potential risks while promoting responsible innovation, using a technology-neutral approach designed to adapt as AI evolves.

This convention stands as the first legally binding global framework for AI, harmonizing with Union law, including the EU AI Act, the world’s first extensive AI regulation. The EU, through its Commission and member states, played an active role in the negotiation process, contributing significantly to the convention’s development. The treaty aligns with the principles outlined in the EU AI Act and other EU regulations, incorporating fundamental elements such as:

  • A focus on human-centric AI, consistent with human rights, democracy, and rule of law
  • A risk-based approach
  • key principles for trustworthy AI (e.g. transparency, robustness, safety, data governance and protection)
  • transparency for AI-generated content and in interactions with AI systems
  • strengthened documentation, accountability and remedies
  • support to safe innovation through regulatory sandboxes
  • risk management obligations
  • documentation obligations
  • oversight mechanisms for supervision of AI activities

The treaty will come into force three months after five signatories, including at least three Council of Europe member states, ratify it. This provision ensures that the treaty can be implemented effectively while allowing time for widespread adoption. Negotiated by the Council of Europe, the treaty involved contributions from 46 member states, the EU, and 11 non-member states, including Argentina, Australia, Canada, Costa Rica, the Holy See, Israel, Japan, Mexico, Peru, the US, and Uruguay. Representatives from the private sector, civil society, and academia also participated as observers.

Council of Europe Secretary General Marija Pejčinović Burić highlighted the treaty’s significance, stating,

We must ensure that the rise of AI upholds our standards rather than undermining them. The Framework Convention is designed to ensure just that. It is a strong and balanced text – the result of the open and inclusive approach by which it was drafted and which ensured that it benefits from multiple and expert perspectives. The Framework Convention is an open treaty with a potentially global reach. I hope that these will be the first of many signatures and that they will be followed quickly by ratifications, so that the treaty can enter into force as soon as possible.

Furthermore, the treaty parties must ensure legal remedies for victims of AI-related human rights violations and provide procedural safeguards, such as notifying individuals when they are interacting with AI systems. The treaty also requires parties to prevent AI from undermining democratic institutions and processes, including the separation of powers, judicial independence, and access to justice. While the convention does not apply to national security activities, it mandates that such activities comply with international law and democratic principles. It also excludes national defense and research and development activities, except when AI testing could affect human rights, democracy, or the rule of law.