“Generative AI Guide for Civil Society”, January 5 2026

(…) With the emergence of various generative AI services—such as chatbots like ChatGPT and Gemini, and tools that create images, music, and videos—an increasing number of citizens are using them for both professional and personal purposes. Civil society activists are no exception. However, while they are being utilized, usually based on individual judgment even for work-related tasks, almost no organization currently has an organizational-level policy on generative AI.

There are many points that civil society organizations (CSOs) must consider when using generative AI. For example, if factual inaccuracies (hallucinations) from generative AI are included in an organization’s official documents, the organization’s credibility can be severely damaged. Security issues may arise if personal or confidential information is uploaded to unreliable commercial services. Furthermore, the output of generative AI might contain biases that conflict with the organization’s values. The process of drafting a statement using generative AI may exclude aspects crucial for activist capacity building and internal organizational deliberation. If activists use AI tools based on individual choice without an organizational policy, there is a high likelihood that issues beyond the organization’s control will emerge.

(…)

However, in the Korean context, there is a lack of guidelines available regarding whether it is appropriate for civil society organizations to utilize generative AI services, what principles and policies should govern their use if they choose to do so, and what guidance can be referenced from a human rights perspective.

(…)

To create this guide, we conducted a survey on which AI tools are actually being used for which tasks, how useful generative AI is perceived to be, and what problems users are experiencing. (…) Furthermore, we held workshops with civil society and labor union activists focusing on generative AI.