No New Rules Needed to Safeguard Fundamental Rights Online, UN Speakers Say
Human rights assessments should be part of any Internet policy discussion to ensure that any restrictions on access to online content are appropriate and necessary to address specific issues, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navanethem Pillay said in Geneva Wednesday at the first U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC) debate on the right to free expression on the Internet. “The world is moving online big time, very fast,” said Swedish Foreign Affairs Minister Carl Bildt. The freedoms people cherish in the offline world must be protected on the Internet, he said. But he and others agreed that no new rules or standards are needed to guarantee those rights.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
The Universal Declaration on Human Rights applies to all forms of communication, whether through oral, written, art or Internet means, said Frank La Rue, special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to free speech and expression. The online world brings new interactivity to traditional communications forms, but the free speech standards are the same, he said.
The main risk to human rights comes from governments failing to grasp the opportunity the Internet brings to ensure individual freedoms, said Anriette Esterhuysen, executive director of the Association for Progressive Communications, South Africa. Officials must decide whether to make their starting point Internet opportunities rather than risks, she said. Administrations tend to be overwhelmed by Internet challenges when they should focus more on its benefits, an unidentified Canadian delegate said.
The HRC should try to come up with mechanisms to prevent online censorship, La Rue said. Administrations are increasingly misusing and abusing criminal laws against terrorism, banking fraud and other activities to shutter online free speech, he said. There are legitimate limitations to online rights but they must be narrowly defined, he said. La Rue said he disagrees with Internet blocking by intermediaries such as ISPs.
China’s joint statement with a long list of countries, including Cuba, Bangladesh and Ethiopia, acknowledged that the Internet is indispensable to people’s daily lives, but stressed that free expression isn’t absolute and should be exercised in strict compliance with international laws. It called on the world community to promote access to the Internet in developing countries, but said users in all countries should respect the rights of others and that governments should enact tougher laws against online crimes.
Bildt countered that there’s no need for different laws on the Internet. Governments who see only evil and problems online are hampering their societies from developing in the rapidly evolving world of connectivity, he said. Harmful use of the Internet requires better enforcement, but restrictions such as blocking are “a cheap alternative” to the rule of law, Esterhuysen said. “Technical shortcuts should not be used to solve societal problems,” Internet Society Vice President of Public Policy Marcus Kummer said. Regulation should be a “measure of last resort,” said the Council of Europe.
Corporations also bear responsibility for safeguarding rights online, said a Dutch government official. Off-the-shelf monitoring and hacking software is selling well, but companies must not make vital technologies complicit in rights abuses, he said. The Netherlands has asked the European Commission to include such products in the EU dual-use regulation (defined by the European Commission as products normally used for civilian purposes but which may have military applications).
The U.N. HRC should focus urgently on individuals’ ability to exercise their rights online, the U.S. said. It’s also concerned about the emerging trend for governments to force private companies to suppress content deemed subversive or to harass those voicing opinions, it said.
Google is often put in the position of mailman and made responsible for content, said William Echikson, Google head of free expression, external relations, communications and public affairs. The search engine doesn’t believe the Internet should be a “wild West” and will take down content if lawfully ordered by a court to do so, he said. But it reports the take-down on chillingeffects.org and makes the actions public, he said.
Access to the Internet is a crucial element, La Rue said. He and several delegations called for an end to the digital divide.