The Concept of Personal Integrity and Neurolaw: a Review of Controversial Issues

INTRODUCTION. The article examines the evolution of the concept of the integrity of the person in international law. An analysis of universal and regional international legal acts, as well as cases considered by international judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, confirms the dual nature of this concept, which consists of the right to physical integrity and the right to mental integrity of the person. The article pays particular attention to the challenges posed by the rapid development of neurotechnology, which require a rethinking of the concept of the integrity of the person, particularly its mental component. The doctrine considers approaches that propose either the creation of new, so-called neurorights, or their inclusion within the existing right to mental integrity of the person, protected by analogy with the experience of safeguarding the right to physical integrity.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. The study is based on a comprehensive analysis of international legal acts and the case law of international judicial bodies. Its methodological basis comprises general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, systematic approach) and specific legal methods (formal-logical, structural-legal, comparative-legal). Particular emphasis is placed on the combined use of the comparative-legal method and the systematic approach in analysing the protection of the right to the integrity of the person among fundamental human rights at the universal and regional international levels. In addition, the author applies the ‘stairs study’ method when examining the practice of international judicial bodies in this field.
THE RESEARCH RESULTS. It has been established that the concept of the integrity of the person enshrined in international law is dual in nature, covering physical and mental integrity. It is shown that while the physical aspect has been developed in sufficient detail, the mental component has long remained in the shadows and has only recently become the subject of active discussions. It has been revealed that the development of neurotechnologies (neurostimulation, neurohacking, memory manipulation) poses threats to mental autonomy and cognitive freedom of a person, which actualizes the issue of the need for a new system of guarantees.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The article discusses various doctrinal approaches to protecting mental integrity: from broadening the interpretation of existing rights (the right to respect for private life, human dignity, freedom of thought) to creating new special rights (the right to mental privacy, the right to cognitive freedom, the right to mental self-determination). The author agrees with the prevailing view that neurorights should be considered not as entirely new rights, but as a logical development of the right to mental integrity of the person. It is concluded that mental integrity should be legally defined and specified, by analogy with physical integrity, while considering modern neurotechnological risks, in order to ensure the effective protection of fundamental human rights and dignity.

1. Abashidze A.A., Solncev A.M. Novoe pokolenie prav cheloveka: somaticheskie prava [A new generation of human rights: somatic rights]. – Moskovskij zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava [Moscow Journal of International Law]. 2009. № 1. S. 69-82. (In Russ.)

2. Addis A. Dignity, integrity, and the concept of a person. – ICL Journal. 2019. Vol. 13. No. 4. P. 323-372.

3. Alegre S. Rethinking freedom of thought for the 21st century. – European Human Rights Law Review. 2017. Т. 3. No. 13. P. 221-233.

4. Bublitz C. Neurotechnologies and human rights: restating and reaffirming the multi-layered protection of the person. – The International Journal of Human Rights. 2024. Vol. 28. No. 5. P. 782-807.

5. Bublitz C. The nascent right to psychological integrity and mental self-determination. – The Cambridge Handbook of New Human Rights: Recognition, Novelty, Rhetoric. Eds. by A. von Arnauld, K. von der Decken, M. Susi. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. 2020. P. 387-403.

6. Cowell J.M., Decety J. The neuroscience of implicit moral evaluation and its relation to generosity in early childhood. – Current Biology. 2015. Vol. 25. No. 1. P. 93-97.

7. Craig J.N. Incarceration, direct brain intervention, and the right to mental integrity: a reply to Thomas Douglas. – Neuroethics. 2016. Vol. 9. No. 2. P. 107-118.

8. Hawkins N. A red herring: invalidity of human gene sequence patents. – European Intellectual Property Law Review. 2016. Vol. 38. No. 2. P. 83-91.

9. Hertz N. Neurorights – do we need new human rights? A reconsideration of the right to freedom of thought. – Neuroethics. 2023. Vol. 16. Art. 5. URL: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12152-022-09511-0 (data obrashhenija: 17.06.2025).

10. Ienca M., Andorno R. Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology. – Life Sciences, Society and Policy. 2017. Vol. 13. Art. 5. P. 1-27.

11. Istace T. Protecting the mental realm: what does human rights law bring to the table? – Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights. 2023. Vol. 41. No. 4. P. 214-234.

12. Kalinichenko P.A., Ponomareva D.V. Jetiko-pravovye aspekty regulirovanija genomnyh issledovanij v mezhdunarodnoj i rossijskoj praktike [Ethical and legal aspects of genomic research regulation in international and Russian practice]. – Medicinskaja radiologija i radiacionnaja bezopasnost' [Medical radiology and radiation safety]. 2019. T. 64. № 5. S. 69-70. (In Russ.)

13. Kosilkin S.V. Principy mezhdunarodno-pravovogo regulirovanija geneticheskih issledovanij i zakonodatel'stvo Rossijskoj Federacii [Principles of international legal regulation of genetic research and legislation of the Russian Federation]. – Lex Genetica. 2023. № 2 (2). S. 3452. (In Russ.)

14. Kravec I.A. Pravo na celostnost' lichnosti [The right to the integrity of the person]. – Prava cheloveka: osnovnye ponjatija, kategorii, instituty: uchebnyj slovar' [Human rights: basic concepts, categories, institutions: an educational dictionary]. Ekaterinburg: Gumanitarnyj un-t. 2023. 240 s. (In Russ.)

15. Kudrjavcev M.A. Dostoinstvo cheloveka i pravo na celostnost' lichnosti kak nravstvennyj imperativ nauchnotehnicheskogo progressa [Human dignity and the right to the integrity of the person as a moral imperative of scientific and technological progress]. – Vzaimodejstvie prava i morali. Materialy Mezhdunar. nauch. konf. [The interaction of law and morality. Materials of the International Scientific Conference]. Moscow. 20 maja 2014 g. Moscow: Mosk. gumanit. un-t. 2014. S. 91-98. (In Russ.)

16. Lavazza A. Freedom of thought and mental integrity: the moral requirements for any neural prosthesis. – Frontiers in Neuroscience. 2018. Vol. 12. Art. 82. P. 1-10.

17. Ligthart S.L.T.J. Coercive Neuroimaging Technologies in Criminal Law in Europe: Exploring the Legal Implications for the Prohibition of III-Treatment (Article 3 ECHR). – Regulating new technologies in uncertain times. The Hague: TMC Asser Press. 2019. P. 83-102.

18. Semeshko A.I., Suhanova M.G. Pravo na psihicheskuju celostnost' cheloveka: opredelenie ponjatija v kontekste mezhdunarodno-pravovogo regulirovanija [The right to human mental integrity: definition of the concept in the context of international legal regulation]. – Permskij juridicheskij al'manah [Perm Law Almanac]. 2021. № 4. S. 162-174. URL: https://sciup.org/pravo-na-psihichesku-ju-celostnost-chelovekaopredelenie-ponjatija-v-kon-tekste-147236850 (data obrashhenija: 08.09.2025). (In Russ.)

19. Tesink V., Douglas T., Forsberg L. et al. Right to mental integrity and neurotechnologies: implications of the extended mind thesis. – Journal of Medical Ethics. 2024. Vol. 50. No. 10. P. 656-663.

20. Torkunova E.A. Primenenie vspomogatel'nyh reproduktivnyh tehnologij v kontekste prava na celostnost' lichnosti: mezhdunarodnyj i rossijskij opyt [The use of assisted reproductive technologies in the context of the right to the integrity of the person: international and Russian experience]. – Vestnik Universiteta imeni O.E. Kutafina (MGJuA) [Bulletin of the O.E. Kutafin University (MGUA)]. 2025. № 3. S. 93-103. (In Russ.)

21. Torkunova E.A. Shherbakova A.I. Pravovoe oformlenie evgeniki i sovremennye pravovye tendencii v svete novejshih biotehnologij [The legal formalization of eugenics and current legal trends in the light of the latest biotechnologies]. – Istorija gosudarstva i prava [History of the state and law]. 2020. № 11. S. 51-80. (In Russ.)

22. Torkunova E.A. Zapret evgenicheskih praktik v Evrope: politiko-pravovye prichiny [Prohibition of eugenic practices in Europe: political and legal reasons]. – Moskovskij zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava [Moscow Journal of International Law]. 2024. № 4. C. 46-56. (In Russ.)