Seventy-five years ago, as our Constitution came freshly inked, “We the People” comprised citizens coming out of a colonial history and into a more luminous democratic future. Now, “We the People” is not just about what happens when we come together on the streets and in meeting halls, but also about how we communicate online, which voices are elevated, and how unseen systems decide. The aim must be to make sure that the Constitutional ideals don’t get outpaced by the times in this new digital era, in which software can steer public opinion as effectively as any lawmaker. The Founding Fathers who crafted our Constitution did not envision smartphones, social media or artificial intelligence. However, their vision still moves us. They gave us such freedoms as freedom of speech, as well as equality under the law, the rights that hung our fledgling nation from the ceiling as its frame dried. These rights now must go further. Ensuring a “right to privacy” has become more critical than ever in a world where our personal data is constantly being captured and analysed. Is it time to raise privacy from a legal to a core fundamental right that merits the same treatment we reserve for free speech and equality?
As Nani Palkhivala once said, “The Constitution is a permanent document intended to meet the needs of an ever-changing society.” On this 75th anniversary of the founding of our democracy, we are at a crossroads in time, as old principles intersect with new challenges. Perhaps we should heed a reminder from Bollywood’s Rang De Basanti: “Koi bhi desh perfect nahin hota, use perfect banana padta hai” If our founding document once guided a nation emerging from colonial rule, it must now help us confront a digital future of algorithms, data flows and online communities. So, what would it look like to create new rights for the realities of today? What if we recognised a “right to digital dignity” or a “right to fair algorithms”? These may sound like futuristic ideas, but think about it: If algorithms are determining who gets a loan or job interview or government benefit, should we at least not be entitled to know how those programs operate and make sure that they don’t discriminate against anyone?
This isn’t only about where things take place, of course; we need new conceptual tools to fully understand these shifts. Introducing the concept of Algocentrism considering the acknowledgement that algorithms are at the centre of governance and social experience. Where we once tended to look only at human institutions like ministries, courts and legislatures, we now must look at how AI-driven systems shape outcomes. Who receives a government subsidy, what kinds of policy proposals enjoy traction, how social services are allocated. By adopting an Algocentric view, we realise and accept that digital architectures are not a hack or patchwork to be ignored but are fundamental to our democratic life. They, therefore, must be brought as well within the fold of constitutional scrutiny, animated by our founding principles, rather than sprinting ahead of them unchecked.
Algocentrism is, in fact, part of a larger set of frameworks called Algorisprudence that calls on us to treat AI, algorithms, and digital platforms as legal entities and artificial people that directly affect rights and obligations. There’s also something that’s been called Algorithmic Personhood Theory, which imagines treating certain types of advanced AIs as if they were responsible entities for the purposes of regulation and that if the decisions that are being made in an automated way have harmful effects within a community, we have some legal way to hold them to account. These wider ideas may be faint echoes of futures past or sci-fi, but they are useful lenses, forcing us to remember that our constitutional context has now to consider both human beings and machine entities as actors functioning within it.
What if we had a “right to fair algorithms” so that automated decision-making can’t silently discriminate against certain communities? If an artificial intelligence driven system is vetting job applicants or deciding who receives health benefits, shouldn’t we be able to know how it was built and which criteria are being used, and shouldn’t we insist that it treat each of us with justice and dignity? This would be a bold step. Broadening fundamental rights isn’t an act to be undertaken lightly; it comes through deep thought, public debate and visionary leadership. But our founders weren’t afraid of being bold. They built a Constitution flexible enough to adapt, grow with the times, and meet challenges they could never have imagined.
So in this 75th anniversary year of this living document, maybe it is time to have an open conversation about what the next generation of fundamental rights should look like. Rather than just attaching laws and regulations to our ever morphing reality, let’s engrain new principles in our most fundamental constitutional values. By bringing these ingredients together, we help protect the Constitution’s soul while giving it the means needed to protect “We the People” in a time of data centres and digital platforms It’s true strength lies in its ability to evolve, allowing us to enshrine rights that guide us as effectively through the twists of the AI-driven future as they did through the trials of our past.
By doing so, we breathe new life into our founding document and ensure that the dignity, freedom and fairness it once guaranteed in the courts and public squares now must also be true in algorithmic spaces. The embrace of Algocentrism, and thus the broader paradigm of Algorisprudence, preserves our constitutional legacy, and in doing so it shows us that even in a digital age, it remains “We the People” who must collectively construct the future we want to see. This is a conversation not just for experts or government officials, it’s the conversation we all need to have. What rights must we safeguard for our children in a digital technology rich world? How can we ensure that the tools we create benefit people rather than leaving them behind? By considering these questions thoughtfully, we embody the actual spirit of our Constitution. It’s more than a piece of paper — it’s a pact that we have made and will continue making together, generation after generation, to ensure that our society remains equitable and just.
Right now, countries everywhere are struggling to control powerful new digital tools. A leading role can be played by us by using the Algorisprudence, Algocentrism and Algorithmic Personhood theory and showing to the world a better way. Our strong democratic and moral traditions can guide how we use these new technologies. If other countries do as we have done, we will not only safeguard our own future, we will help elevate the standard of fairness and justice worldwide.
By fearlessly contemplating new fundamental rights, we will revitalise our founding document. If our future is increasingly described in lines of code, isn’t it time that we determine what story those lines will tell—and make sure its a story of fairness, dignity, freedom, and compassion that the journey ahead truly belongs to “We the People.”
The author is Assistant Professor (Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad) & Doctoral Fellow (Jindal Global Law School).
