Can neurotechnologies be used responsibly in the rehabilitation of convicted persons, respecting fundamental freedoms and rights? This is the question we have endeavoured to answer throughout this book. The human rights challenges generated by new and emerging neurotechnologies have been widely noted by scholars, ethics committees and human rights bodies. This has prompted a debate on how and to what extent human rights protect – and should protect – against unsolicited interference with our brains and minds. In a recent report on the impact, opportunities and challenges of neurotechnology in relation to human rights, the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee concluded that neurotechnologies can affect human rights in a “unique manner”. Therefore, developing an actionable human rights approach is of the “utmost importance”. Some of their concerns relate to the potential use of neurotechnology in the criminal justice system, holding that “most of the applications proposed are extremely problematic from a human rights perspective”. For example, they consider that “forceful extraction of information from detainees or offenders through the use of neurotechnology is prohibited”.