Encoding Marginalization: A Document Analysis of How State and Corporate AI Architectures Impact Religious Minorities in The Global North and Global South

Abstract

Background: The rapid global proliferation of artificial intelligence architectures is frequently framed as technologically neutral, obscuring how these systems inherently encode and operationalize structural biases against religious minorities. While the marginalization of these communities through digital surveillance and automated moderation is a universal phenomenon, the specific mechanisms driving this oppression diverge significantly across geographical contexts.

Objectives: This study aims to systematically extract, classify, and compare the regulatory language and structural frameworks governing AI deployment across the Global North and the Global South, identifying how state and corporate architectures disparately impact religious minority rights.

Methods: This study employed a qualitative documentary analysis, systematically reviewing state legislative texts, corporate AI policy guidelines, and triangulated human rights baseline reports spanning 2015 to 2026.

Results: The analysis reveals a fundamental hemispheric bifurcation in digital marginalization. In the Global North, oppression is predominantly covert, mediated by corporate algorithmic bias, opaque content moderation, and ostensibly neutral predictive policing architectures that inadvertently criminalize minority identities. Conversely, in the Global South, marginalization is heavily characterized by the overt state weaponization of imported biometric and surveillance tools, facilitated by deliberate domestic regulatory voids and broad national security exemptions. Despite these divergent mechanisms, both hemispheres share a structural absence of religious-rights-centered AI governance frameworks.

Conclusion: The study concludes that the systemic marginalization of religious minorities is a structural feature, not an anomaly, of current global AI deployment. Countering localized digital repression requires shifting the focus from generalized technological ethics to robust, context-specific regulatory frameworks that explicitly enforce the freedom of religion or belief against both corporate algorithmic negligence and authoritarian state mandates.

References

Abid, A., Farooqi, M., & Zou, J. (2021). Persistent anti-Muslim bias in large language models. Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, 298–306. https://doi.org/10.1145/3461702.3462624

Algorithmic Accountability Act of 2023, H.R. 5628, 118th Cong. (2023). https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/5628/text

Al-Rawi, A. (2022). Hashtagged trolling and emojified hate against Muslims on social media. Religions, 13(6), 521. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel13060521

Amnesty International. (2023). Automated apartheid: How facial recognition fragments, segregates and controls Palestinians in the OPT. https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/6701/2023/en/

Aras, İ., & Günar, A. (2026). China's digital surveillance and religious practices in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. Kocatepe İslami İlimler Dergisi, 9(Özel Sayı), 96–108. https://doi.org/10.52637/kiid.1853591

Ashraf, C. (2022). Exploring the impacts of artificial intelligence on freedom of religion or belief online. The International Journal of Human Rights, 26(5), 757–791. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2021.1968376

Australian Strategic Policy Institute. (2019). Mapping more of China's tech giants: AI and surveillance. https://www.aspi.org.au/report/mapping-more-chinas-tech-giants

Bill C-27, An Act to enact the Consumer Privacy Protection Act, the Personal Information and Data Protection Tribunal Act and the Artificial Intelligence and Data Act and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts, 1st Sess., 44th Parl., 2022. https://www.parl.ca/legisinfo/en/bill/44-1/c-27

Birhane, A. (2020). Algorithmic colonization of Africa. SCRIPTed, 17(2), 389–409. https://doi.org/10.2966/scrip.170220.389

Bundesverfassungsgericht. (2023, February 16). Judgment of the First Senate of 16 February 2023 - 1 BvR 1547/19. https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/EN/2023/02/rs20230216_1bvr154719en.html

Buolamwini, J., & Gebru, T. (2018). Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 81, 77–91. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v81/buolamwini18a.html

Byler, D., & Ketter, C. (2024). On the travel of state crimes by algorithm: Chinese camera systems in Israel. Made in China Journal, 9(1), 18–21. https://doi.org/10.22459/MIC.09.01.2024.02

Centre for Policy Alternatives. (2024). The Online Safety Act: Implications for freedom of expression, surveillance, and minority rights in Sri Lanka. https://www.cpalanka.org/the-online-safety-act-implications-for-freedom-of-expression-and-minority-rights/

Council of Europe. (2018). Study on the human rights dimensions of automated data processing techniques (in particular algorithms) and possible regulatory implications. https://rm.coe.int/study-on-the-human-rights-dimensions-of-automated-data-processing-techn/16807908b1

Council on American-Islamic Relations. (2023). Twenty years too many: A review of the FBI's secret watchlist and automated screening architectures. https://www.cair.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Watchlist-Report-2023-Final.pdf

Cyberspace Administration of China. (2022). Provisions on the management of algorithmic recommendations for internet information services (Order No. 9). http://www.cac.gov.cn/2022-01/04/c_1642894606364259.htm

Dahman, A., & Saou, H. (2025). Algorithmic Orientalism: A systems analysis of anti-Muslim bias in artificial intelligence. RSIC, 10(2), 13–28. https://doi.org/10.55781/rsic.v10i2.541

Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, Act No. 22 of 2023 (India). https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Digital%20Personal%20Data%20Protection%20Act%202023.pdf

Digital Rights Foundation. (2022). Surveillance, censorship and religious minorities online: A review of PECA enforcement in Pakistan. https://digitalrightsfoundation.pk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Policy-Brief-PECA-and-Freedom-of-Expression.pdf

Exec. Order No. 14110, 88 Fed. Reg. 75191 (Nov. 1, 2023). https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/11/01/2023-24283/safe-secure-and-trustworthy-development-and-use-of-artificial-intelligence

Fattoumi, F. (2026). Beyond recognition: The complexities of biometrics and minority rights. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 14(3), 15–35. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2026.143002

Goodfriend, S. (2023). Algorithmic state violence: Automated surveillance and Palestinian dispossession in Hebron's Old City. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 55(3), 543–561. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743823000879

Google. (2023). Artificial intelligence at Google: Our principles. https://blog.google/technology/ai/ai-principles/

Google. (2024). Generative AI prohibited use policy. https://policies.google.com/terms/generative-ai/use-policy

Human Rights Watch. (2018). "Eradicating ideological viruses": China's campaign of repression against Xinjiang's Muslims. https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/09/09/eradicating-ideological-viruses/chinas-campaign-repression-against-xinjiangs

Human Rights Watch. (2019). China's algorithms of repression: Reverse engineering a Xinjiang police mass surveillance app. https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/05/01/chinas-algorithms-repression/reverse-engineering-xinjiang-police-mass-surveillance

Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, G.S.R. 139(E) (India). https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Intermediary_Guidelines_and_Digital_Media_Ethics_Code_Rules-2021.pdf

Internet Freedom Foundation. (2023). Project Panoptic: Tracking the unregulated growth of facial recognition technology in India. https://panoptic.in/report-2023

Jigsaw. (2022). Perspective API. https://perspectiveapi.com/

Khine, N. K. (2023). Digital rights in post-coup Myanmar: Enabling factors for digital authoritarianism. Journal of Human Rights and Peace Studies, 9(2), 186–216. https://so03.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/HRPS/article/view/266778

La Quadrature du Net. (2023, March 23). Algorithmic video surveillance and the 2024 Olympics: An unprecedented threat to fundamental freedoms. https://www.laquadrature.net/en/2023/03/23/olympic-games-surveillance-french-parliament-legalizes-algorithmic-video-surveillance/

Meta. (2024). Community standards. https://transparency.meta.com/policies/community-standards/

Mitchell, M., Wu, S., Zaldivar, A., Barnes, P., Vasserman, L., Hutchinson, B., Spitzer, E., Raji, I. D., & Gebru, T. (2019). Model cards for model reporting. Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 220–229. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287596

Mohamed, S., Png, M. T., & Isaac, W. (2020). Decolonial AI: Decolonial theory as sociotechnical foresight in artificial intelligence. Philosophy & Technology, 33(4), 659–684. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00405-8

Online Safety Act 2023, c. 50 (UK). https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50/contents/enacted

OpenAI. (2025). OpenAI usage policies. https://openai.com/policies/usage-policies/

Patel, F., & Melendi, J. (2024). Advances in AI increase risks of government social media monitoring. Brennan Center for Justice. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/advances-ai-increase-risks-government-social-media-monitoring

Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016, Act No. XL of 2016 (Pak.). https://na.gov.pk/uploads/documents/1472635250_246.pdf

Privacy International. (2022). The global trade in biometric surveillance: Exporting oppression from the Global North to the Global South. https://privacyinternational.org/report/4981/global-surveillance-trade

R (Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales Police & Ors, [2020] EWCA Civ 1058. https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2020/1058.html

Ranaware, V., & Mishra, R. (2026). Unquestioned use of AI-based facial recognition technology in criminal investigations: Delhi riots lessons on rights and reliability. Engineering Proceedings, 143(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2026143017

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence, OJ L, 2024/1689. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32024R1689

Richardson, R., Schultz, J. M., & Crawford, K. (2019). Dirty data, bad predictions: How civil rights violations impact police data, predictive policing systems, and justice. N.Y.U. Law Review Online, 94, 15. https://nyulawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/NYULawReview-94-Richardson_etal-FIN.pdf

Schissler, M. (2024). Beyond hate speech and misinformation: Facebook and the Rohingya genocide in Myanmar. Journal of Genocide Research, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623528.2024.2375122

Selbst, A. D. (2017). Disparate impact in big data policing. Georgia Law Review, 52(1), 109–176. https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/glr/vol52/iss1/4/

Shaheed, A. (2022). Rights of persons belonging to religious or belief minorities in situations of conflict or insecurity: Report of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief (A/HRC/49/44). UN Human Rights Council. https://undocs.org/A/HRC/49/44

Sinnar, S. (2025). The Supreme Court & the unaccountable racialized security state. Daedalus, 154(4), 106–121. https://doi.org/10.1162/DAED.a.945

South Asia Collective. (2022). South Asia state of minorities report 2022: Weakening human rights commitments and its impact on minorities. Minority Rights Group International. https://minorityrights.org/publications/south-asia-state-of-minorities-report-2022/

Southeast Asia Freedom of Expression Network (SAFEnet). (2022). Digital authoritarianism in Indonesia: Permenkominfo 5/2020, algorithmic governance, and minority vulnerability. https://safenet.or.id/en/2022/08/safenet-report-on-mr5-and-digital-authoritarianism/

Statewatch. (2023). Automating the border: AI, biometrics, and the securitisation of migration in the European Union. https://www.statewatch.org/analyses/2023/automating-the-border/

Topal, R. (2023). A techno-docility approach to the repression and surveillance of Uyghurs. Asian Survey, 64(1), 143–167. https://doi.org/10.1525/as.2023.2079647

UN General Assembly. (2018). Promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression (A/73/348). https://undocs.org/A/73/348

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2021). The right to privacy in the digital age: Artificial intelligence, biometric technologies, and discrimination (A/HRC/48/31). UN Human Rights Council. https://undocs.org/A/HRC/48/31

UN Human Rights Council. (2018). Report of the independent international fact-finding mission on Myanmar (A/HRC/39/64). https://undocs.org/A/HRC/39/64

United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. (2024). Annual report 2024. https://www.uscirf.gov/annual-reports

Veale, M., & Borgesius, F. Z. (2021). Demystifying the Draft EU Artificial Intelligence Act, Analysing the good, the bad, and the unclear elements of the proposed approach. Computer Law Review International, 22(4), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.9785/cri-2021-220402

Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region People's Congress. (2018). Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region regulation on de-extremification. China Law Translate. https://www.chinalawtranslate.com/en/xinjiang-de-extremification-regulations-2018/