Evaluating the Philosophical Necessity of a "Constitutional Right to Mental Privacy"

The advancement of brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) and neurotechnologies presents unparalleled challenges to personal liberty, privacy, and constitutional legislation. Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) facilitate direct access to cerebral data, potentially disclosing thoughts, intentions, and cognitive processes to external entities, including governmental agents. This study analyzes the philosophical and legal need for instituting neurorights, emphasizing a constitutional right to mental privacy. The research assesses the intersection of brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) with established civil freedoms, such as freedom of thinking, personal autonomy, and protection against governmental overreach, by incorporating concepts from cognitive science, philosophy of mind, and constitutional theory. The study contends that current legal frameworks inadequately safeguard persons against non-consensual or covert neuro-surveillance, asserting that the acknowledgment of a constitutional right to mental privacy is both ethically and legally warranted. It culminates with policy proposals for integrating neuro-rights into country constitutions and international human rights legislation, including recommendations for specific legal protections and frameworks that ensure individuals' mental privacy and autonomy are respected and upheld.