When data votes for you: Artificial Intelligence and the vulnerability of Political Rights
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46502/issn.2792-3681/2026.10.10Keywords:
artificial intelligence, political rights, digital democracy, algorithmic manipulation, democratic legitimacy.Abstract
Artificial intelligence has established itself as a disruptive force in the contemporary public sphere, capable of transforming political participation and infringing on fundamental rights. Phenomena such as the algorithmic manipulation of public opinion and the massive use of data to profile voters—as evidenced in the Cambridge Analytica case—constitute direct threats to the very core of the democratic contract. This study aims to analyze the relationship between artificial intelligence and political rights, highlighting how algorithms can erode citizenship and what legal and institutional responses are necessary to protect it. The research adopts an interdisciplinary approach that integrates constitutional law, political theory, and artificial intelligence studies, using a qualitative, hermeneutic, and normative methodology based on the critical analysis of doctrinal, normative, and jurisprudential sources, as well as paradigmatic cases, including standards from the Inter-American human rights system. It concludes that political rights must serve as a structural pillar in the face of the risks posed by artificial intelligence, as any infringement upon them undermines democratic legitimacy and requires robust regulatory frameworks that safeguard these rights.
References
Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas. (2005). Principios y directrices básicos sobre el derecho de las víctimas de violaciones manifiestas de las normas internacionales de derechos humanos a interponer recursos y obtener reparaciones (Principios de Van Boven-Bassiouni). Resolución 60/147, 16 de diciembre de 2005. https://www.ohchr.org/es/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/basic-principles-and-guidelines-right-remedy-and-reparation
Brito Paredes, P., Villavicencio Aguilar, C., & Sánchez Saca, P. (2019). Reflexiones sobre posibles conflictos entre la inteligencia artificial y el futuro de la sociedad. Revista de la Universidad del Zulia, 10(28), 260–280. https://produccioncientificaluz.org/index.php/rluz/article/view/30800
Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. (2005). Caso Yatama vs. Nicaragua. Sentencia de 23 de junio de 2005. Serie C No. 127. https://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_127_esp.pdf
Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. (2008). Caso Castañeda Gutman vs. México. Sentencia de 6 de agosto de 2008. Serie C No. 184. https://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_184_esp.pdf
De Greiff, P. (2006). The Handbook of Reparations. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199291926.001.0001
De Greiff, P. (2010). Justicia y reparación. En R. Uprimny, M. Saffon, C. Botero & E. Restrepo (Eds.), ¿Justicia transicional sin transición? Verdad, justicia y reparación para Colombia (pp. 21–44). Dejusticia.
Naciones Unidas (1966). Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos. Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas, Resolución 2200 A (XXI), 16 de diciembre de 1966. https://www.ohchr.org/es/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-and-political-rights
Organización de los Estados Americanos (1969). Convención Americana sobre Derechos Humanos. (Pacto de San José), 22 de noviembre de 1969. https://www.oas.org/dil/esp/tratados_b-32_convencion_americana_sobre_derechos_humanos.htm
Pérez Cobo, G., & Espinoza, H. R. (2025). Contribución de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos y la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos a la materialización de los derechos políticos. Revista Diké, Irene y Eunomía (RDIE), 1(1), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.36151/RDIE.2025.1.1.04
Pérez Palencia, M. G. (2024). Epistemolog-IA: la confluencia de la inteligencia artificial y la epistemología en el desarrollo científico contemporáneo. Ciencia Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar, 8(4), 11236–11257. https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v8i4.13264
Román-Acosta, D. (2024). Exploración filosófica de la epistemología de la inteligencia artificial: una revisión sistemática. Revista Uniandes Episteme, 11(1), 101–122. https://doi.org/10.61154/rue.v11i1.3388
Sikkink, K. (2011). The Justice Cascade: How Human Rights Prosecutions Are Changing World Politics. W. W. Norton.
Sousa Santos, B. de. (2009). Sociología jurídica crítica: Para un nuevo sentido común en el derecho. Trotta.
Teitel, R. G. (2000). Transitional Justice. Oxford University Press.
UNESCO. (2024). Artificial intelligence and democracy. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000389736
Vadillo Bueno, G. (2020). Futuros de la inteligencia artificial. Revista Digital Universitaria, 21(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.22201/codeic.16076079e.2020.v21n1.a3
Villasmil Espinoza, J. J. (2021). Implicaciones de la inteligencia artificial para la humanidad. Revista de la Universidad del Zulia, 12(32), 4–6. https://doi.org/10.46925//rdluz.32.01
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Héctor Rafael Espinoza Rangel
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
The authors retain copyright and guarantee the journal the right to be the first publication where the article is presented, which is published under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows others to share the work prior to acknowledgment of the authorship of the article. work and initial publication in this journal.
Authors may separately enter into additional agreements for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in the journal (for example, placing it in an institutional repository or publishing it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
