"Internet universality": Human rights and principles for the internet

This paper details proposals by UNESCO to manufacture and draft a concept of “Internet Universality” that adopts a human-rights framework as a basis for articulating a set of principles and rights for the Internet. The paper discusses various drafts of this concept before examining the Charter of Human Rights and Principles for the Internet put forward by The Internet Rights & Principles Dynamic Coalition based at the UN Internet Governance Forum, and the working law Marco Civil da Internet introduced by Brazil

Democracy and Digital Authoritarianism: An Assessment of the EU’s External Engagement in the Promotion and Protection of Internet Freedom. College of Europe EU Diplomacy Paper 01/2020

The past decade has seen a gradual global increase in digital authoritarianism. Internet shutdowns, online censorship, mass surveillance and violations of privacy rights have all become more frequent in parts of the world where citizens are not guaranteed sufficient digital rights. The task of defending, promoting and protecting internet freedom is becoming increasingly relevant for the European Union (EU) − for internal digital and cybersecurity policies as well as for the EU’s external promotion of democracy and human rights. Whilst much has been written about the various internal policies which establish and protect internet freedom within the European Union and its member states, the EU’s external engagement in this field remains critically under-researched. To what extent does the EU engage externally in the promotion and protection of internet freedom? This paper answers this question by covering a wide variety of policy fields including human rights and democracy promotion, digital policy, enlargement and neighbourhood policy, development cooperation and trade policy. Whereas the EU faces a limited opportunity to shape global norms with regard to internet freedom or to change the course of digitally authoritarian states, it has demonstrated several strengths which deserve not to be overlooked. These include, for example, the externalisation of internal data protection and policies and the provision of direct support and protection for civil society. Despite facing significant obstacles, the promotion and protection of internet freedom has become an important area of the EU’s external action which is only set to become more relevant in the coming years

Unshackle the Internet: Independent Voices and the Role of Foreign Internet Companies Operating in China

Advances in information technology have the potential to empower individuals globally and to serve as a force for democratization. The number of Internet users in mainland China continues to increase at a phenomenal rate. From 1998 to 2005, China's online population grew from 1.17 million to 103 million, with the most recent official count in January 2006 at approximately 110 million.In China, the Internet has become an increasingly important tool for empowering Chinese activists, journalists, rights defenders, intellectuals and grassroots groups by providing increased access to information as well as a virtual commons for the exchange of ideas between groups and individuals.However, technology and control of the Internet have also been utilized by the Chinese government to implement censorship, surveillance and social and political control.In the last several months, as foreign IT companies have come under media and U.S. government scrutiny, HRIC has been actively monitoring the human rights impact of their activities and developing suggestions for implementing the human rights responsibilities of foreign-based IT companies operating in China

Nameless in Cyberspace: Anonymity on the Internet

Proposals to limit anonymous communications on the Internet would violate free speech rights long recognized by the Supreme Court. Anonymous and pseudonymous speech played a vital role in the founding of this country. Thomas Paine's Common Sense was first released signed, "An Englishman." Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, James Madison, Samuel Adams, and others carried out the debate between Federalists and Anti-Federalists using pseudonyms. Today, human rights workers in China and many other countries have reforged the link between anonymity and free speech. Given the importance of anonymity as a component of free speech, the cost of banning anonymous Internet speech would be enormous. It makes no sense to treat Internet speech differently from printed leaflets or books

European Court of Human Rights: Kalda v. Estonia

For the first time the European Court of Human Rights has stated that denying a prisoner access to the Internet may amount to a violation of Article 10 of the Convention. In Estonia Mr Kalda, who is serving a life sentence in prison, requested from the governor of the prison access to the online version of the State Gazette, to the decisions of the Supreme Court and administrative courts, and to the HUDOC database of the European Court of Human Rights

THE INTERNET BETWEEN PROMOTION AND INFRINGEMENT OF THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS FREEDOMS vs. CYBERCRIMES

The Internet has become a mean by which individuals can exercise their right to freedom of opinion and expression, as well as the freedom of association, which, both play a crucial role in supporting democracy and guaranteeing human rights. But, at the same time, it also has become a mean for human rights infringement such as privacy, discrimination of specific vulnerable groups, espionage, child pornography and prostitution, as well as the democratic destabilization. The fundamental rights are neither created, nor abrogated by any state or non-state actor, being attached to humans at their birth only by the fact of being humans. “All men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity.” These rights, recognized as universal, inalienable and indivisible, are supported by the International Bill of Human Rights, which comprises three main legal instruments: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The promotion and protection of all human rights and of democratic principles serves as an international minimum standard widely enforced. Therefore, the framework of international human rights law remains relevant and equally applicable to new communication technologies, such as the Internet.Internet, human rights, freedom, cybercrime, privacy, espionage, discrimination

Using a Human Rights Framework for Regulating the Internet of Things: The Critical Role of Human Rights Advocacy

The Internet of Things (IoT) refers to the billions of technical devices around the globe that connect to and communicate through the Internet. These devices collect, store and share vast amounts of valuable data. With the advent of 5G (fifth generation cellular network technology), IoT is expected to grow even more dramatically over the coming decade and likely to change our lives in ways we have yet to imagine. IoT holds the promise of advancing human rights by facilitating the technology that can lead to a healthier, cleaner, and more sustainable environment, and greater access to education, better healthcare, capital, financial services and markets. However, these benefits are potentially at the peril to “first and second generation” human rights. The concern for human rights abuses of IoT technologies makes the need for comprehensive regulation an urgent national and international priority. This paper surveys the current approaches being taken (and those suggested) for regulating the IoT and assesses how, if at all, human rights (and human rights norms) are explicitly being taken into consideration. The presentation would build off and update surveys already done examining efforts to draft an “Internet bill of rights” and other efforts to provide comprehensive IoT regulation. For example, The Internet of Things (IoT) Cybersecurity Improvement Act of 2017, S. 1691, 115th Cong. (2017), is a bill that seeks to improve the security of Internet-connected devices. Its language, even in its prefatory statements, is devoid of references to human rights. The bill itself, however, authorizes the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to set standards under the bill. Interestingly, NIST does consider human rights in its determination of standards. Institutions like NIST and its counterparts like the European Telecommunications Standards Institute and the China National Institute of Standardization as well as the International Standards Organization are important players in the “constitutionalization” of the Internet and the regulation of IoT. Their explicit and implicit incorporation of human rights discourse in the development of national and international standards appear to establish obligations and limitations on international, national, and private actors involved in Internet platforms. These standards comport with the development of an “Internet Bill of Rights” championed by human rights and other civil society organizations. Anti-globalist and deregulation movements as well as the fragmentation of Internet governance provides challenges to legally binding IoT regulation. However, the frame of human rights provides a common language that can guide effective IoT regulation and provide legitimacy for international Internet governance that can promote human rights norms. By examining the standard-setting organizations and their nascent standards regarding IoT, it is apparent that human rights advocates have and continue to provide a key role in the regulation of the Internet of Things

Keystones to foster inclusive knowledge societies: access to information and knowledge, freedom of expression, privacy, and ethics on a global internet

The transnational and multi-dimensional nature of Cyberspace and its growing importance presents new frontiers with unparalleled opportunities and challenges for access to information and knowledge, freedom of expression, privacy and ethics. The Internet Study being undertaken by UNESCO is seeking to provide the necessary clarity to support holistic approaches to addressing this broad range of interrelated issues as well as their short and long-term effects. The study was built on a year-long multistakeholder consultation process, which involved several rounds of consultation with member states and other actors, as well as almost 200 major responses to an online questionnaire. The Study includes the Options for future actions of UNESCO in the Internet related issues, which has served as a basis for the Outcome Document as adopted by the CONNECTing the Dots Conference on 3 and 4 March 2015. The Study also affirmed that the same rights that people have offline must be protected online, and good practices are shared between Member States and other stakeholders, in order to address security and privacy concerns on the Internet and in accordance with international human rights obligations. The Study also supports the Internet Universality principles (R.O.A.M) that promote a human rights-based approach, including freedom of expression, privacy, open Internet, accessible to all and characterized by multistakeholder participation

Where is the "Frugal Olympics"?

The one-year countdown to the 2008 Beijing Olympics and its media fanfare have come and gone, leaving behind persistent calls for an "economical and practical" Olympics to counteract perceived waste and excess in preparing for the Games. Increasingly, in the past few years, such sentiments have found their way onto the Internet, in blogs, discussion forums and local papers as a full accounting of the spending on various Olympic constructions and events has yet to be fully disclosed to the public.Similar to the open letter "OneWorld,One Dream and Universal Human Rights" from 40 Chinese academics, writers and human rights activists, these sentiments against an extravagant and wasteful Olympics provide another perspective often hidden from themedia glare aimed at festivities and publicity campaigns. This HRIC Issues Brief provides a sample of the range and diversity of these critical views on the Beijing Olympic Games expressed by Chinese Netizens on general blogs and Internet discussion and news forums

Corporate Social Responsibility and Social Media Corporations: Incorporating Human Rights Through Rankings, Self-Regulation and Shareholder Resolutions

This article examines the emergence and evolution of selected ranking and reporting frameworks in the expanding realm of business and human rights advocacy. It explores how indicators in the form of rankings and reports evaluating the conduct of transnational corporate actors can serve as regulatory tools with potential to bridge a global governance gap that often places human rights at risk. Specifically, this article examines the relationship of transnational corporations in the Internet communications technology sector (ICT sector) to human rights and the risks presented to the right to freedom of expression and the right to privacy when ICT sector companies comply with government demands to disclose user data or to conceal information users seek. Specifically, it explores the controversial role of transnational ICT corporations in state censorship and surveillance practices. The article explains how conflicts over corporate complicity in alleged abuses served to catalyze change and lead to the creation of the Global Network Initiative, a private multi-stakeholder project, and the Ranking Digital Rights Initiative, an industry independent market-based information effort. Both aim to promote more responsible business practices in the social media industry sector. In conclusion, the article argues that regulating corporate reporting of information relevant to assessing the potential for adverse human rights impacts is necessary