Rome Call for AI Ethics
A signed pledge promoting an ethical approach to AI, convened by the Pontifical Academy for Life and signed in Rome on 28 February 2020 by Microsoft, IBM, the FAO and the Italian government, and since by many further organisations - including leaders of other religious traditions at the 2024 Hiroshima meeting. Sets out "algor-ethics": ethics by design from the start of each algorithm's development, and six principles - transparency, inclusion, responsibility, impartiality, reliability, and security and privacy. Grounds these in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, calls for a "duty of explanation" for algorithmic decisions and for new forms of regulation of higher-risk technologies such as facial recognition, but binds no one beyond their signature.
Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.
Who issued it
Who it governs
This document is for international organizations, governments, institutions, technology companies, researchers, and individuals seeking to guide AI development and deployment through shared ethical principles.
What the document contains
The document addresses the ethical implications of artificial intelligence, emphasizing human dignity, environmental sustainability, educational reform for the digital age, and the necessity of human rights protection in the digital era. It outlines core principles for ethical AI design and deployment, proposing frameworks like ethics by design and a duty of explanation for algorithmic decision-making.
It lacks specific legal enforcement mechanisms, technical compliance metrics, concrete penalties for violations, and detailed sectoral regulations.
- Artificial intelligence must be developed to serve every person and humanity as a whole, respecting human dignity and rights.
- Technological advancement must meet the requirements of inclusion, human-centric focus, and environmental sustainability.
- Education systems must be overhauled to incorporate digital skills and ethical considerations across humanities and sciences, leaving no one behind.
- New forms of regulation and a duty of explanation are needed to ensure transparency, traceability, and responsibility in AI systems.
- The Rome Call establishes six foundational principles: transparency, inclusion, responsibility, impartiality, reliability, and security and privacy.
· Introduction · Ethics · Education · Rights · 6 ethical principles
How it scores
Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.
Accountability
4/5Clear responsibility for AI outcomes
there must always be someone who takes responsibility for what a machine does
principle 3, Responsibility
screening score · 2026-08-20
Fairness
4/5Non-discrimination and equitable treatment
do not create or act according to bias, thus safeguarding fairness and human dignity
principle 4, Impartiality (cf. Ethics section, UDHR Art. 2 non-discrimination)
screening score · 2026-08-20
Human Dignity
4/5Respect for the inherent worth of persons
This fundamental condition of freedom and dignity must also be protected and guaranteed when producing and using AI systems
Ethics section, on UDHR Art. 1
screening score · 2026-08-20
Human Oversight
2/5Humans remain in control of consequential decisions
each person must be aware when he or she is interacting with a machine
Ethics section - disclosure that one is dealing with a machine; 'oversight' appears 0 times in the text
screening score · 2026-08-20
Privacy
3/5Protection of personal data and private life
AI systems must work securely and respect the privacy of users
principle 6, Security and privacy - named as a core principle, one line, no mechanism
screening score · 2026-08-20
Transparency
4/5Openness about how AI systems work and are used
These devices must be able to offer individuals information on the logic behind the algorithms used to make decisions. This will increase transparency, traceability and responsibility
Rights section ('duty of explanation') + principle 1
screening score · 2026-08-20
Enforcement
2/5Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force
New forms of regulation must be encouraged to promote transparency and compliance with ethical principles, especially for advanced technologies that have a higher risk of impacting human rights, such as facial recognition
Rights section - addressed to future regulators; the Call itself has no compliance mechanism
screening score · 2026-08-20
Impact Assessment
1/5Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use
we must set out from the very beginning of each algorithm’s development with an “algor-ethical” vision, i.e. an approach of ethics by design
Rights section, 'ethics by design' - no assessment procedure; 'assess'/'evaluat'/'audit' appear 0 times
screening score · 2026-08-20