The potential of artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies to help or harm is "almost limitless", according to the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC).

The organisation launched a major new project on Tuesday, aimed at producing a blueprint for how Australia can regulate high-tech tools to benefit humankind and not harm it.

It is one of the most significant projects Edward Santow will take on as human rights commissioner, and he said Australia should focus on "responsible innovation" in the face of technologies that threaten to worsen inequality.

As well as advocating for technological accessibility for people living with disabilities, the AHRC is looking at the use of artificial intelligence in decision making.

"The risks really go to all of our human rights, including ones that we take very seriously indeed, like equality and non-discrimination," Mr Santow said.

Currently, computer algorithms are used globally to identify cancer risk, but also to target people for debt collection and predict crime hotspots.

"What we've started to see is … people who are already disadvantaged or marginalised being further disadvantaged," he explained.

In the United States, for example, the use of an algorithm that estimated the risk of individuals committing a future crime was accused of bias against African Americans.

Facial recognition software raises many serious humans rights concerns. ( Getty Images: SAUL LOEB/AFP )

In Australia, too, there were reports in 2017 about predictive policing — a "secret blacklist", according to researchers — by New South Wales police.

Known as the Suspect Target Management Plan (STMP), Mr Santow said police added about 1,800 people to a list, allegedly subjecting them to intrusive scrutiny.

It is not clear what factors were used to determine who was placed on the STMP.

"It also was publicly acknowledged that over 50 per cent of the people on that Suspect Target Management Plan are Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander," Mr Santow said.

"That suggests that something has gone badly wrong."

NSW police commissioner Mick Fuller later said he believed "in STMP and I believe in proactivity, but I am not proud of the incarceration rates of Aboriginal people in New South Wales".

A need for racial diversity

The AHRC has asked for public submissions on technology and discrimination.

It has also formed an "Expert Reference Group" to advise on the project pro bono, bringing together participants from the public and private sectors as well as academia.

This article contains content that is not yet available here.

The group features leading voices such as Australia's chief scientist Alan Finkel and Australian National University's Genevieve Bell.

But it does not include official representation from groups often subject to technological surveillance, such as the Muslim community and Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders.

When asked about the lack of racial diversity in the Expert Reference Group, Mr Santow said the AHRC plans on using extensive consultation to talk to a broad cross section of the community.

The AHRC discussion paper will be released in early 2019 and a final report will be published by early 2020.

The announcement came ahead of the AHRC's human rights and technology conference, held in Sydney on Tuesday.

The United Nation's special rapporteur on the right to privacy Joseph Cannataci will speak at the event.

He said we should pay special attention to the impact of new technologies on vulnerable groups — whether minorities of race, religion or sexual preference.

"All of those could be affected by any form of surveillance," he said.

"In fact, we've seen examples in other countries where CCTV which was set up in a particular area, which was predominantly a Muslim area, had to be withdrawn."

Political appetite for change

Whether Mr Santow's message of "responsible innovation" will be embraced politically remains to be seen.

Professor Cannataci said Australian politicians "seem to have been shy to speak of the word 'human rights'".

"If you look at speeches by Australian politicians, they're always talking about 'customers', about 'consumers', and this I find rather disturbing," he said.

In a play on US president John F. Kennedy's famous words, he added: "You shouldn't be asking yourself what you can do for business, but you should be asking yourself, what can business do for you?"

When asked if Australia was lagging behind the rest of the world when discussing questions of technology and human rights, Professor Cannataci pointed out that the country has no bill of rights and few constitutionally protected rights.

"It's never too late to be discussing technology and human rights," he said.

"The problem, of course, is the way that Australia has approached human rights."

Mr Santow said the AHRC is on record saying Australia needs comprehensive rights protections.

Nevertheless, he said the law would play only one part in ensuring technological gains benefit everyone equally — ensuring humans rights was part of the design process was also essential.

"We are the ones who choose here how, for example, we're going to regulate the way new technology products are used," Mr Santow explained.

"We also get to choose how pervasive new facial recognition technology will be.

"All of those things are within our control."