Holding Tech Companies Accountable For Religious Persecution
(ANALYSIS) Artificial intelligence, technology and social media have changed our lives in more ways than we ever imagined — in both positive and negative effects and many more yet to be discovered as these tools continue to evolve.
AI, technology and social media have been used to address some of the worst atrocity crimes, including religious persecution.
In the context of atrocity crimes, AI and machine learning techniques can help document, verify, organize and analyze evidence much faster than humans could alone. AI tools can assist in documenting atrocities, analyzing large data sets and identifying patterns needed to establish the legal elements of international crimes.
READ: Wherever Christian Faith Travels, Doubt Rides Piggyback
Such techniques have already been used in conflicts and situations involving atrocity crimes around the world. Similarly, social media has helped people find assistance and reconnect with missing loved ones. However, AI, technology and social media have also been used and abused to perpetrate atrocity crimes. This darker side requires greater attention and more comprehensive responses.
For example, in Xinjiang, China, the government has used technology, including advanced facial recognition systems, to monitor Uyghurs and other minority groups and repress religious and ethnic communities.
In Myanmar, the military used social media platforms to spread propaganda against Rohingya Muslims and justify attacks on the community, paving the way for what is now recognized as the Rohingya genocide. In Iraq and Syria, Daesh (also known as the Islamic State, ISIS or ISIL), a nonstate actor, used social media to spread propaganda and recruit supporters. It also spread hatred against Yazidis, describing them as devil worshippers and infidels, and engaged in human trafficking of Yazidi women for sexual exploitation.
The use and abuse of AI, technology and social media to perpetrate atrocity crimes require new approaches to accountability. One avenue is corporate accountability through legal action. Some countries already have laws that enable this form of accountability, which can result in substantial fines for corporations found complicit in such crimes, prison sentences for responsible individuals and significant damages for victims and survivors to help them rebuild their lives.
In October 2025, a federal jury in New York found BNP Paribas, France’s largest bank, liable for more than $20.5 million in damages for its role in providing banking services to Sudanese leaders as they committed international crimes, including genocide, in the country between 2002 and 2008. The damages are to be paid to three Sudanese plaintiffs who now live in the United States.
In December 2023, more than 400 Yazidis, members of an ethnoreligious minority group, filed a lawsuit against Lafarge SA, a global building materials manufacturer, alleging that the company conspired to provide material support to Daesh’s campaign of terrorism against the Yazidi population.
In 2022, Lafarge pleaded guilty to conspiring to provide material support and resources to Daesh and the al-Nusrah Front in northern Syria from 2013 to 2014. As part of its guilty plea, the company agreed to pay more than $777 million in fines and forfeiture to the United States. However, the victims received no compensation. The new lawsuit seeks to change that.
Similar legal avenues should be pursued against corporations that provide AI tools, other technological solutions and social media platforms that have become instruments for waging war and perpetrating atrocities against individuals and entire communities.
From the Yazidis to the Rohingya, from the Uyghurs to other communities facing growing threats around the world, the use and abuse of AI, technology and social media must not go unpunished. Ignoring these new methods of persecution means that responses to such atrocities will never be adequate.
Corporate accountability for involvement in international crimes is a means of pursuing justice after atrocities have been committed. Although it is an important tool, it is not sufficient on its own. We must also consider how to prevent such atrocities and ensure that AI, technology and social media companies play a role in identifying when and where their products are being used or abused to perpetrate atrocities. They must work to mitigate the harmful effects of these products and prevent their misuse from contributing to further crimes.
Ultimately, atrocity crimes do not happen overnight. Early warning signs and risk factors can be visible weeks, months or even years before atrocities occur. There is therefore no excuse for failing to invest in prevention. At a minimum, companies must identify where and how their products are being used or abused to incite or enable atrocity crimes and take action to stop such use.
Dr. Ewelina U. Ochab is a human rights advocate, author and co-founder of the Coalition for Genocide Response. She is on X @EwelinaUO.