Search Tips
sorted by
300 shown of 1365 entities
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 75
- Paragraph text
- Emergency or national security laws are also often used to justify restrictions on citizen journalists' expression of views or dissemination of information through the Internet, often on the basis of protecting vaguely defined national interests or public order. For example, on 27 February 2004, the Special Rapporteur, together with the Chairperson of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, sent an urgent appeal to the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic regarding the arrest of a person in relation to articles which he distributed by e-mail, mainly from the Akhbar al-Sharq Internet site (www.thisissyria.net). The Syrian authorities were quoted as saying that material on the site is "detrimental to the reputation and security of the nation" and "full of ideas and views opposed to the system of Government in Syria".
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 76
- Paragraph text
- In other cases, laws or decrees that explicitly regulate online expression have been adopted and used to restrict the peaceful expression of opinion and ideas. For example, on 17 May 2010, at the conclusion of his fact-finding mission to the Republic of Korea, the Special Rapporteur issued a press statement in which he expressed concerns regarding Internet-specific legislation, in particular the Framework Act on Telecommunications and the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection. The Special Rapporteur noted that the former was used as the basis for arresting a blogger for posting online articles which were critical of the Government's economic policy in the context of the financial crisis, while the latter has been used to delete online posts and to sentence or fine individuals who initiated online campaigns for a consumer boycott.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 79
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur is alarmed and concerned that the number of journalists and media personnel killed in 2009 was the highest since 1992, and that 81 per cent of those killings were deliberate and targeted. While the risk of armed conflict increases the risk to the lives of journalists and other media professionals, more journalists were killed in non-conflict situations, mostly for reporting on organized crime or drug trafficking, environmental matters or human rights violations and corruption, or for voicing criticism of Government or the powerful.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 81
- Paragraph text
- It is also worrying that the number of journalists forced into exile as a result of attacks, threats and possible imprisonment doubled between 2009 and 2010 compared with the previous year. While the host Government has the obligation to respect and to ensure the rights of all individuals within its territory, regardless of nationality or other grounds, the Special Rapporteur reiterates the obligation of all States to guarantee the protection of journalists and others who exercise their right to freedom of expression in their own countries in the first place.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Movement
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 82
- Paragraph text
- Citizen journalists have come to play an increasingly important role in gathering and disseminating news, in particular in countries where press freedom is restricted, or in a disaster or conflict zone where professional journalists may not be present. While they cannot replace professionally trained journalists, they contribute to the public's access to a richer diversity of views, opinions and information. Like professional journalists, and for the same reasons, citizen journalists are subjected to acts of harassment and intimidation, including death threats, arbitrarily arrested and detained, prosecuted and sentenced to imprisonment and/or to harsh fines, and even assassinated. However, they enjoy less protection than professional journalists, as they do not have the support of media organizations and networks, and lack recognition as professional journalists.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 88
- Paragraph text
- Given that in at least 4 of every 10 cases involving the murder of journalists, the victims receive threats before being killed, the Special Rapporteur urges all Governments to investigate such threats and ensure effective protection, for example through witness protection programmes. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur notes that detailed guidelines and recommendations have been set out in the report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary executions (see A/63/313), the reports of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the right to the truth (A/HRC/12/19 and A/HRC/15/33) and the analytical study on human rights and transitional justice (A/HRC/12/18).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 89
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur also encourages all States to establish an early-warning and urgent response mechanism for the protection of journalists; such a mechanism should also exist for the protection of human rights defenders. It should be an official State commission with high-level recognition and an appropriate budget, composed of high-level representatives of State institutions related to security, territorial administration and human rights, as well as representatives of journalists' associations, media associations and non-governmental organizations working on issues related to the right to freedom of expression. The Commission's plan of work and urgent response procedures should be determined through a common agreement among its members, according to the circumstances of the country or a region within the country.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Key trends and challenges to the right of all individuals to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds through the Internet 2011, para. 15b
- Paragraph text
- [Hence, the types of information or expression that may be restricted under international human rights law in relation to offline content also apply to online content. Similarly, any restriction applied to the right to freedom of expression exercised through the Internet must also comply with international human rights law, including the following three-part, cumulative criteria:] Any restriction must pursue one of the legitimate grounds for restriction set out in article 19, paragraph 3, of the International Covenant, namely (i) respect of the rights or reputation of others; or (ii) the protection of national security or of public order, or of public health or morals;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Key trends and challenges to the right of all individuals to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds through the Internet 2011, para. 15c
- Paragraph text
- [Hence, the types of information or expression that may be restricted under international human rights law in relation to offline content also apply to online content. Similarly, any restriction applied to the right to freedom of expression exercised through the Internet must also comply with international human rights law, including the following three-part, cumulative criteria:] Any restriction must be proven as necessary and proportionate, or the least restrictive means to achieve one of the specified goals listed above.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 21
- Paragraph text
- By explicitly providing that everyone has the right to express him or herself through any media, the Special Rapporteur underscores that article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Covenant was drafted with foresight to include and to accommodate future technological developments through which individuals can exercise their right to freedom of expression. Hence, the framework of international human rights law remains relevant today and equally applicable to new communication technologies such as the Internet.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 22
- Paragraph text
- The right to freedom of opinion and expression is as much a fundamental right on its own accord as it is an "enabler" of other rights, including economic, social and cultural rights, such as the right to education and the right to take part in cultural life and to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications, as well as civil and political rights, such as the rights to freedom of association and assembly. Thus, by acting as a catalyst for individuals to exercise their right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Internet also facilitates the realization of a range of other human rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Education
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 23
- Paragraph text
- The vast potential and benefits of the Internet are rooted in its unique characteristics, such as its speed, worldwide reach and relative anonymity. At the same time, these distinctive features of the Internet that enable individuals to disseminate information in "real time" and to mobilize people has also created fear amongst Governments and the powerful. This has led to increased restrictions on the Internet through the use of increasingly sophisticated technologies to block content, monitor and identify activists and critics, criminalization of legitimate expression, and adoption of restrictive legislation to justify such measures. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur also emphasizes that the existing international human rights standards, in particular article 19, paragraph 3, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, remain pertinent in determining the types of restrictions that are in breach of States' obligations to guarantee the right to freedom of expression.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 24a
- Paragraph text
- [As set out in article 19, paragraph 3, of the Covenant, there are certain exceptional types of expression which may be legitimately restricted under international human rights law, essentially to safeguard the rights of others. This issue has been examined in the previous annual report of the Special Rapporteur. However, the Special Rapporteur deems it appropriate to reiterate that any limitation to the right to freedom of expression must pass the following three-part, cumulative test:] It must be provided by law, which is clear and accessible to everyone (principles of predictability and transparency); and
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 63
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur notes that several initiatives have been taken in an attempt to bridge the digital divide. At the international level, Target 8f of the Millennium Development Goals calls upon States, "in consultation with the private sector, [to] make available the benefits of new technologies, especially information and communications." The necessity of achieving this target was reiterated in the 2003 Plan of Action adopted at the Geneva World Summit on the Information Society, which outlines specific goals and targets to "build an inclusive Information Society; to put the potential of knowledge and [information communication technologies] (ICTs) at the service of development; to promote the use of information and knowledge for the achievement of internationally agreed development goals." To implement this plan of action, in 2005, the International Telecommunication Union launched the "Connect the World" project. Another initiative to spread the availability of ICTs in developing countries is the "One Laptop Per Child" project that has been supported by the United Nations Development Programme. This project distributes affordable laptops that are specifically customized for the learning environment of children. Since this project was mentioned in the previous mandate holder's report in 2006, 2.4 million laptops have been distributed to children and teachers worldwide. In Uruguay, the project has reached 480,000 children, amounting to almost all children enrolled in primary school. States in Africa lag behind, but in Rwanda, over 56,000 laptops have been distributed, with plans for the figure to reach 100,000 by June 2011.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Education
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 64
- Paragraph text
- At the national level, the Special Rapporteur notes that a number of initiatives have also been taken by States to address the digital divide. In India, Common Service Centres, or public "e-Kiosks", have been established by the Government in collaboration with the private sector as part of the National E-Governance Plan of 2006. As of January 2011, over 87,000 centres have reportedly been established, although the Special Rapporteur notes that the majority of the country's population still remains without Internet access. In Brazil, the Government has launched a "computers for all" programme which offers subsidies for purchasing computers. Additionally, over 100,000 publicly sponsored Internet access centres, known as "Local Area Network (LAN) Houses" with fast broadband Internet connections, have been established. Such public access points are particularly important to facilitate access for the poorest socio-economic groups, as they often do not have their own personal computers at home.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 65
- Paragraph text
- In some economically developed States, Internet access has been recognized as a right. For example, the parliament of Estonia passed legislation in 2000 declaring Internet access a basic human right. The constitutional council of France effectively declared Internet access a fundamental right in 2009, and the constitutional court of Costa Rica reached a similar decision in 2010. Going a step further, Finland passed a decree in 2009 stating that every Internet connection needs to have a speed of at least one Megabit per second (broadband level). The Special Rapporteur also takes note that according to a survey by the British Broadcasting Corporation in March 2010, 79% of those interviewed in 26 countries believe that Internet access is a fundamental human right.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 77
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur commends the work undertaken by organizations and individuals to reveal the worldwide status of online impediments to the right to freedom of expression. He encourages intermediaries in particular to disclose details regarding content removal requests and accessibility of websites. Additionally, he recommends corporations to establish clear and unambiguous terms of service in line with international human rights norms and principles and to continuously review the impact of their services and technologies on the right to freedom of expression of their users, as well as on the potential pitfalls involved when they are misused. The Special Rapporteur believes that such transparency will help promote greater accountability and respect for human rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 78
- Paragraph text
- While blocking and filtering measures deny users access to specific content on the Internet, States have also taken measures to cut off access to the Internet entirely. The Special Rapporteur considers cutting off users from Internet access, regardless of the justification provided, including on the grounds of violating intellectual property rights law, to be disproportionate and thus a violation of article 19, paragraph 3, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 81
- Paragraph text
- When a cyber-attack can be attributed to the State, it clearly constitutes, inter alia, a violation of its obligation to respect the right to freedom of opinion and expression. Although determining the origin of cyber-attacks and the identity of the perpetrator is often technically difficult, it should be noted that States have an obligation to protect individuals against interference by third parties that undermines the enjoyment of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. This positive obligation to protect entails that States must take appropriate and effective measures to investigate actions taken by third parties, hold the persons responsible to account, and adopt measures to prevent such recurrence in the future.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 83
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur underscores the obligation of States to adopt effective privacy and data protection laws in accordance with article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Human Rights Committee's general comment No. 16. This includes laws that clearly guarantee the right of all individuals to ascertain in an intelligible form whether, and if so what, personal data is stored in automatic data files, and for what purposes, and which public authorities or private individuals or bodies control or may control their files.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 30
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur is also concerned by the emerging trend of timed (or "just-in-time") blocking to prevent users from accessing or disseminating information at key political moments, such as elections, times of social unrest, or anniversaries of politically or historically significant events. During such times, websites of opposition parties, independent media, and social networking platforms such as Twitter and Facebook are blocked, as witnessed in the context of recent protests across the Middle East and North African region. In Egypt, users were disconnected entirely from Internet access.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 84
- Paragraph text
- He also calls upon States to ensure that individuals can express themselves anonymously online and to refrain from adopting real-name registration systems. Under certain exceptional situations where States may limit the right to privacy for the purposes of administration of criminal justice or prevention of crime, the Special Rapporteur underscores that such measures must be in compliance with the international human rights framework, with adequate safeguards against abuse. This includes ensuring that any measure to limit the right to privacy is taken on the basis of a specific decision by a State authority expressly empowered by law to do so, and must respect the principles of necessity and proportionality.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 85
- Paragraph text
- Given that the Internet has become an indispensable tool for realizing a range of human rights, combating inequality, and accelerating development and human progress, ensuring universal access to the Internet should be a priority for all States. Each State should thus develop a concrete and effective policy, in consultation with individuals from all sections of society, including the private sector and relevant Government ministries, to make the Internet widely available, accessible and affordable to all segments of population.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Hate speech and incitement to hatred 2012, para. 68
- Paragraph text
- A third set of measures concerns data collection and analysis, in addition to more targeted research, in relation to freedom of expression and hate speech. This includes various forms of hate speech, the main perpetrators, where and under what circumstances hate speech occurs, who the messages reach and through which avenues, whether and which media outlets contest such messages, and in which cases and under what circumstances hate speech actually constitutes incitement in a manner that links content with action. In most countries, comprehensive data on such areas are glaringly absent. Consequently, policies and legislation are frequently based on perception. Systematic disaggregated data collection and analysis, using human-rights-sensitive methodologies, enable a better understanding of problems in a given country, the creation of better-targeted policies and the possibility of evaluation. For example, the aforementioned Living History Forum in Sweden carries out periodic attitude surveys to ensure that its efforts are focused where they are most needed. Data collection and analysis can also help to establish early warning mechanisms and aid in the effective enforcement of the law. International cooperation in these areas could help to increase not only comparability of data but also knowledge about the nature of hate speech that transcends boundaries. A clear distinction between expression that constitutes incitement, hate speech and merely offensive speech should be at the core of any such data-collection and analysis exercise.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Hate speech and incitement to hatred 2012, para. 37
- Paragraph text
- In particular, the rights of others are undermined when deep-rooted hatred is manifested and expressed under certain circumstances. International human rights law therefore recognizes that the right to freedom of expression can indeed be restricted where it presents a serious danger for others and for their enjoyment of human rights. Indeed, article 19 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights stipulates that the exercise of the right to freedom of expression carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but only such as are provided by law and are necessary for respect of the rights or reputations of others and for the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 45
- Paragraph text
- While States are the duty-bearers for human rights, private actors and business enterprises also have a responsibility to respect human rights. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur highlights the framework of "Protect, Respect and Remedy" which has been developed by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises. The framework rests on three pillars: (a) the duty of the State to protect against human rights abuses by third parties, including business enterprises, through appropriate policies, regulation and adjudication; (b) the corporate responsibility to respect human rights, which means that business enterprises should act with due diligence to avoid infringing the rights of others and to address adverse impacts with which they are involved; and (c) the need for greater access by victims to effective remedy, both judicial and non-judicial.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and media freedom 2012, para. 100
- Paragraph text
- Bearing in mind that standards exist in international human rights law for the protection of professional journalists outside of armed conflict situations, the Special Rapporteur urges States, with whom the primary responsibility for the protection of journalists lies, to implement those standards at the national level. This includes ensuring that no legislation is passed to unduly limit the freedom of expression of journalists, ensuring the physical and psychological integrity of journalists, and taking steps to tackle impunity for perpetrators of human rights violations against journalists.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and media freedom 2012, para. 110
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur recognizes efforts in countries, such as Colombia and Mexico, to create bodies to offer, inter alia, greater protection to journalists. The Special Rapporteur underlines the importance of the willingness and ability of such bodies to take on a broad range and high number of cases and issues under its competency; to work with autonomy; to have their own and sufficient resources and to have the capacity to coordinate between different authorities. Furthermore, the Special Rapporteur recommends that journalists and civil society organizations participate in the design, integration, functioning and evaluation of these bodies; that they have investigatory powers; that they have the competency to make recommendations to the Governments of their respective countries; that risk-assessment is prompt and efficient; that measures are implemented promptly; and that a contextual approach is adopted. Protection measures must be holistic, including a range of physical, legal, and political measures.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and media freedom 2012, para. 111
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur recommends that civil society organizations work to raise awareness of the risks faced by journalists, the international standards which exist to protect them, and how these might be implemented through campaigns and training initiatives; that civil society organizations, including journalists, make efforts to ensure that global standards of professional conduct are met in order to enhance the credibility and protection of journalists; and that they coordinate with one another and with the United Nations in order to ensure that their work is complementary.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and media freedom 2012, para. 61
- Paragraph text
- Most of the offline media have developed an online alternative, and given that the Internet has become an essential and economic medium for disseminating news to a global audience, leading to an emergence of "online journalists" - both professionals and so-called "citizen journalists" who are untrained, but who play an increasingly important role by documenting and disseminating news as they unfold on the ground. Such an expansion of individuals involved in spreading information has enriched the media landscape by increasing access to sources of information, stimulating informed analysis and promoting the expression of diverse opinions, particularly in moments of crises.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and media freedom 2012, para. 64
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur reiterates that the right to freedom of expression should be fully guaranteed online, as with offline content. If there is any limitation to the enjoyment of this right exercised through the Internet, it must also conform to the criteria listed in article 19, paragraph 3, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This means that any restriction imposed as an exceptional measure must (i) be provided by law, which is clear and accessible to everyone; (ii) pursue one of the legitimate purposes set out in article 19, paragraph 3, of the Covenant; and (iii) be proven as necessary and the least restrictive means required to achieve the purported aim.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 45
- Paragraph text
- In its considerations, the Court has emphasized that the State must demonstrate a certain amount of due diligence in searching and providing information. For example, it was of the view that the State could not seek protection in arguing the lack of existence of the requested documents but, to the contrary, must establish the reason for denying the provision of the said information, demonstrating that it had adopted all the measures within its power to prove that, in effect, the information sought did not exist. Furthermore, the Court deemed it essential that, in order to guarantee the right to information, the public powers should act in good faith and diligently carry out the actions necessary to ensure the effectiveness of that right, especially when it dealt with the right to the truth of what had occurred in cases of gross violations of human rights, such as those of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial execution in the case under consideration.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Movement
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 46
- Paragraph text
- The Court has also considered judicial proceedings to be essential to the right to know the truth, holding that States may establish truth commissions, which contribute to the creation and preservation of historical memory, elucidation of the facts and the determination of institutional, social and political responsibilities during certain historical periods in society. Nevertheless, the Court considers that this does not complete, or substitute for, the State's obligation to establish the truth through judicial proceedings; hence, the State has the obligation to open and expedite criminal investigations in order to determine the corresponding responsibilities.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 19
- Paragraph text
- The right to access information has many aspects. It encompasses both the general right of the public to have access to information of public interest from a variety of sources and the right of the media to access information, in addition to the right of individuals to request and receive information of public interest and information concerning themselves that may affect their individual rights. As noted previously, the right to freedom of opinion and expression is an enabler of other rights (A/HRC/17/27, para. 22) and access to information is often essential for individuals seeking to give effect to other rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 97
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur calls upon States to implement the measures set out below.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 103
- Paragraph text
- States should, in particular, consider the appointment of a focal point, such as an information commissioner, to assist in the implementation of national norms on access to information or the creation of a State institution responsible for access to information. Such mechanisms could be mandated to process requests for information, assist applicants, ensure the proactive dissemination of information by public bodies, monitor compliance with the law and present recommendations to ensure adherence to the right to access information.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 104
- Paragraph text
- The adoption of national norms should be followed by concerted efforts to enhance the technical capacity of State institutions to manage and disseminate information. Moreover, public officials must be trained and have their awareness raised in order to fulfil their responsibilities regarding the adequate maintenance of records and dissemination of information. Further efforts are also necessary to raise public awareness of the right to access information and the existing mechanisms to exercise it.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 106
- Paragraph text
- Information regarding gross violations of human rights must not be withheld on national security grounds. When limitations are deemed absolutely necessary, the State has the burden of proof in demonstrating that the exceptions are compatible with international human rights law. Information regarding other violations of human rights must be subject to a high presumption of disclosure and, in any event, may not be withheld on national security grounds in a manner that would prevent accountability, or deprive a victim of access to an effective remedy. The Tshwane Principles are an important instrument for guiding efforts to revise norms and practices aimed at promoting secrecy on national security grounds.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 107
- Paragraph text
- Government officials who release confidential information concerning violations of the law, wrongdoing by public bodies, grave cases of corruption, a serious threat to health, safety or the environment, or a violation of human rights or humanitarian law (i.e. whistle-blowers) should, if they act in good faith, be protected against legal, administrative or employment-related sanctions. Other individuals, including journalists, other media personnel and civil society representatives, who receive, possess or disseminate classified information because they believe that it is in the public interest, should not be subject to liability unless they place persons in an imminent situation of serious harm.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 18
- Paragraph text
- Human rights mechanisms have been equally slow to assess the human rights implications of the Internet and new technologies on communications surveillance and access to communications data. The consequences of expanding States' surveillance powers and practices for the rights to privacy and freedom of opinion and expression, and the interdependence of those two rights, have yet to be comprehensively considered by the Human Rights Council, special procedures mandate holders or human rights treaty bodies. This report seeks to rectify this.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 66a
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur wishes to highlight the importance of the references made to the disclosure of information on violations of human rights and humanitarian law, stipulated in section A of principle 10 of the Tshwane Principles, namely:] There is an overriding public interest in disclosure of information regarding gross violations of human rights or serious violations of international humanitarian law, including crimes under international law, and systematic or widespread violations of the rights to personal liberty and security. Such information may not be withheld on national security grounds in any circumstances;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 66b
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur wishes to highlight the importance of the references made to the disclosure of information on violations of human rights and humanitarian law, stipulated in section A of principle 10 of the Tshwane Principles, namely:] Information regarding other violations of human rights or humanitarian law is subject to a high presumption of disclosure, and in any event may not be withheld on national security grounds in a manner that would prevent accountability for the violations or deprive a victim of access to an effective remedy;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 66c
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur wishes to highlight the importance of the references made to the disclosure of information on violations of human rights and humanitarian law, stipulated in section A of principle 10 of the Tshwane Principles, namely:] When a State is undergoing a process of transitional justice, during which the State is especially required to ensure truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence, there is an overriding public interest in disclosure to society as a whole of information regarding human rights violations committed under the past regime. A successor government should immediately protect and preserve the integrity of, and release without delay, any records that contain such information that were concealed by a prior government.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 67
- Paragraph text
- In the context of access to information on violations of human rights, the references made in the Tshwane Principles to public interest disclosures (part VI) and limits on measures to sanction or restrain the disclosure of information to the public (part VII) are of particular relevance. Among various recommendations, it is proposed that national law should protect from retaliation public personnel who make disclosures of information showing wrongdoing (such as human rights violations), regardless of whether the information is classified or otherwise confidential. It is further suggested that public bodies establish internal procedures and designate specific persons to receive protected disclosures.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 68
- Paragraph text
- Information on human rights violations involving the activities of national security and intelligence bodies that operate under strict secrecy procedures are often only disclosed by those working within these entities (see A/HRC/10/3). In this regard, the Special Rapporteur has recalled the importance of ensuring the protection of whistle-blowers, that is, persons with a connection to the State who, having a legal obligation to ensure confidentiality, disclose to the public information that they reasonably consider to reveal human rights violations. The Special Rapporteur has indicated that a whistle-blower should not be subjected to legal, administrative or disciplinary sanctions as long as he or she has acted in good faith, pursuant to international standards on the subject. In fact, every person who is involved in or witnesses a human rights violation should assume the moral responsibility to denounce it.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 25
- Paragraph text
- The gravity and the scale of the practice of disappearances by the regimes that were in power in Latin America from the 1960s, and the subsequent struggle of family members and society in general to establish the fate of the victims and to ensure investigation into the facts and punishment of the perpetrators, was initially at the centre of the development of the right to truth. During those regimes, the justice systems of the countries in which such acts occurred were completely ineffective in carrying out investigations into the facts. Moreover, many of the countries concerned adopted amnesty laws that not only ensured impunity for the perpetrators but, in effect, also impeded investigations by the justice systems.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 26
- Paragraph text
- In an attempt to address this issue, in particular since the 1980s, numerous countries have created inquiry commissions, more commonly known as truth commissions, to, in most cases, carry out investigations, make public their findings and provide recommendations regarding reparations and reconciliation. These commissions have largely reported on both the general circumstances leading to and surrounding human rights violations and individual cases. Such commissions were first established in Latin America following the collapse of military regimes and/or the end of armed conflicts that had given rise to large-scale, serious and systematic human rights violations, such as extrajudicial executions, disappearances and even genocide.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 30
- Paragraph text
- In this context, the pursuit of judicial investigations into human rights violations is a core responsibility of the State and a major starting point for the realization of the right to truth. The judicial investigation of individual cases is not sufficient in itself, however; the right to truth implies not only the clarification of the immediate circumstances of particular violations, but also the clarification of the general context, the policies and the institutional failures and decisions that enabled their occurrence. Beyond this, the realization of the right to truth may require the dissemination of information on violations in order to restore confidence in State institutions and ensure non-repetition.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 85
- Paragraph text
- The review of national experiences also demonstrates important positive elements in existing laws and practices. It is clear that provisions establishing objective procedural guarantees which detail the processes required to request and obtain information, in addition to the responsibilities of public bodies in these processes, are a central element for the successful implementation of national norms. The establishment of a broad scope for the right to access to information in national laws is central to the success of the norms. The inclusion of pragmatic instructions among principles, such as that of ensuring that access is rapid, inexpensive and not unduly burdensome, is also positive.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 82
- Paragraph text
- Individuals should have a legal right to be notified that they have been subjected to communications surveillance or that their communications data has been accessed by the State. Recognizing that advance or concurrent notification might jeopardize the effectiveness of the surveillance, individuals should nevertheless be notified once surveillance has been completed and have the possibility to seek redress in respect of the use of communications surveillance measures in their aftermath.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 9
- Paragraph text
- Freedom of expression is enshrined in all international and regional human rights instruments on civil and political rights. In article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, it is recognized that everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds regardless of frontiers. All forms of expression and the means of their dissemination are protected under that article (see para. 2). This right includes the expression and receipt of communications of every kind of idea and opinion that can be transmitted to others, subject to the limitations set out in articles 19, paragraph 3, and 20 of the Covenant.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 51
- Paragraph text
- Inadequate legal standards increase the risk of individuals being exposed to violation of their human rights, including the right to privacy and the right to freedom of expression. They also have an adverse impact on certain groups of individuals - for example, members of certain political parties, trade unionists or national, ethnic and linguistic minorities - who may be more vulnerable to State communications surveillance. Without strong legal protections in place, journalists, human rights defenders and political activists risk being subjected to arbitrary surveillance activities.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 13
- Paragraph text
- Nevertheless, children are not adults, and the fact that they have evolving capacities cannot be avoided. This principle, enshrined in article 5 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, simply reflects the need to take children's "childness" into account, as well as the fact that children evolve and exercise their rights differently from adults. The role accorded to parents and others responsible for the child under article 5 of the Convention suggests that, in practice, children's enjoyment of their right to freedom of expression may not be as expansive as that of adult holders of similarly expressed rights under non-child-specific international human rights instruments. The exercise of the right to freedom of expression expands as children mature, whereas the appropriate direction and guidance provided by parents under article 5 diminishes correspondingly.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Families
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 58
- Paragraph text
- In the Republic of Korea, high school students have promoted a major social mobilization against authoritarian practices within the education system. As a result of the public debate generated by the students, in January 2012, the Seoul Metropolitan Council adopted a students' rights ordinance ensuring, inter alia, the right of students to protest, a ban on corporal punishment, the elimination of mandatory participation in religious activities and the protection of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students and pregnant students against discrimination. Action for Youth Rights of Korea, an association established by Korean students in the context of this mobilization, continues to promote student activism.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Education
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- LGBTQI+
- Youth
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 54
- Paragraph text
- Whereas traditionally communications surveillance was required to be authorized by the judiciary, increasingly this requirement is being weakened or removed. In some countries, interception of communications can be authorized by a governmental minister, their delegate, or a committee. In the United Kingdom, for example, interception of communications is authorized by the Secretary of State; in Zimbabwe, interception of communications is authorized by the Minister for Transport and Communication. Progressively, communications surveillance can also be authorized on a broad and indiscriminate basis, without the need for law enforcement authorities to establish the factual basis for the surveillance on a case-by-case basis.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 50
- Paragraph text
- The imposition of prior censorship to protect children from harmful material provides an example of disproportionate restrictions that run counter to international human rights standards. For instance, in the case The Last Temptation of Christ (Olmedo Bustos et al) v. Chile, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruled that the Government of Chile had violated article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights, on freedom of thought and expression, in banning Martin Scorsese's film The Last Temptation of Christ in order to protect the morals of children. The Court reasoned that children could easily be protected by adopting less restrictive measures than prior censorship, such as controlling their entrance to cinemas.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 51
- Paragraph text
- In a more recent case on prior censorship (Print Media South Africa and Another v. Minister of Home Affairs and Another), the High Court of South Africa declared that an amendment to the South African Films and Publications Act (No. 65 of 1996) infringed the constitutional right to freedom of expression. The amendment required publishers, with some exceptions, to submit publications for prior approval to prevent the exposure of children to age-inappropriate material and to ban child pornography. The decision indicated concerns about a system of prior restraint and the vague and overly broad criteria for classifying publications.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 78
- Paragraph text
- More research is needed to clarify the role of the Internet in the exercise of the rights of the child, in particular with regard to how children use the Internet, how they can learn to do so safely and how the Internet can be viewed as a positive rather than a destructive tool by parents, caregivers and States. It is also important that current restrictions on Internet use be looked at carefully and critically in order to uncover potentially negative consequences for children and adults, encourage practical solutions to Internet safety concerns and maximize opportunities for children on the Internet.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Families
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 79
- Paragraph text
- Children's right to freedom of expression is well established by international human rights treaties, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which represents a milestone for the protection of all children's rights. In practice, recognizing children as full subjects of rights - the vision set out in the Convention - requires a shift in laws, policies and attitudes. Respecting, protecting and promoting the right of children to freedom of expression is at the heart of this shift.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 18
- Paragraph text
- The right to freedom of opinion and expression, as articulated in articles 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is fundamentally interrelated with article 25 of the Covenant, on the right to participation in government through free and fair elections. During electoral processes and in the context of political communication, the equal and unimpeded exchange of contrasting ideas is a crucial prerequisite to ensuring that the voting public can make informed choices and is thus a basic pillar of any democratic system. In the absence of protections to ensure the freedom to express, communicate, publish and discuss political and electoral issues, genuine and effective political participation cannot be realized.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- The communications data collected by third party service providers, including large Internet companies, can be used by the State to compose an extensive profile of concerned individuals. When accessed and analysed, even seemingly innocuous transactional records about communications can collectively create a profile of individual's private life, including medical conditions, political and religious viewpoints and/or affiliation, interactions and interests, disclosing as much detail as, or even greater detail than would be discernible from the content of communications alone. By combining information about relationships, location, identity and activity, States are able to track the movement of individuals and their activities across a range of different areas, from where they travel to where they study, what they read or whom they interact with.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 30
- Paragraph text
- United Nations human rights mechanisms have also considered the permissible limitations upon speech in the context of electoral processes. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has noted that "the fundamental right to freedom of expression does not protect the dissemination of ideas of racial superiority or incitement to racial hatred". In a recent review, the Committee underlined that the fundamental right of freedom of expression should not subtract from the principles of equality and non-discrimination as the exercise of the right to freedom of expression carries with it special responsibilities, among which is the obligation not to disseminate ideas on racial superiority or hatred.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 31
- Paragraph text
- The Committee recommended that the State inter alia reinforce the mandate of the authority which monitors the media to ensure that racist statements are prosecuted and victims granted reparations; ensure that the media do not stigmatize, stereotype or negatively target non-citizens and ethnic minorities; invite the media to strictly respect the Charter of Rome (2008) in order to avoid racist, discriminatory or biased language; and raise awareness among media professionals of their responsibility not to disseminate prejudice and to avoid reporting in a way that would stigmatize communities subject to historical discrimination.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 61
- Paragraph text
- Critically, any regulatory framework pertaining to electoral processes must have as a key objective the achievement of transparency in all facets of political life and discourse. A transparent political process is open to scrutiny by the voters and the media, and enables all players in the process to be held accountable, from political candidates, to public broadcasters, to the electoral authorities. This is the most effective means of ensuring that opinions and ideas can be freely and fully expressed, communicated, debated and promoted during electoral processes.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 73
- Paragraph text
- Concerns about the possible manipulation of opinion polls to influence electoral processes lead some States to restrict the dissemination of poll results for short periods leading up to an election; in general the period ranges from 24 to 36 hours. This restriction is sometimes justified by the limited capacity for verification of the methodology used by the polling agency before the election takes place. In order to ensure transparency and avoid the misuse of opinion polls, some countries have adopted requirements on the public disclosure of the methodology implemented in opinion polling exercises.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 17
- Paragraph text
- Confidential sources rely on others to invoke the right to confidentiality on their behalf. Historically, States have enabled a professional class of journalists to invoke the right, but the revolution in the media and in information over the past 20 years demands reconsideration of such limitations. Article 19, which protects freedom of expression through any media, requires that States take into account a contemporary environment that has expanded well beyond traditional print and broadcast media. The protection available to sources should be based on the function of collection and dissemination and not merely the specific profession of "journalist". The practice of journalism is carried out by "professional full-time reporters and analysts, as well as bloggers and others who engage in forms of self-publication in print, on the Internet or elsewhere" (Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 34, para. 44).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 66
- Paragraph text
- An essential area of transparency during electoral processes relates to the ownership of, and influence exerted over, the media. The increasing consolidation of media outlets in the hands of fewer and fewer companies is of serious concern in the context of political communication. Given the critical public service role played by the media, this monopolization undermines diversity of opinion, raises the risk that information will be controlled or censored, and creates opportunities for bribery, manipulation or exploitation by powerful political or social groups. Furthermore, with increasing frequency, national media sources are, in part or in full, foreign owned. While foreign ownership of media outlets does not in itself undermine the ability of media sources to promote freedom of opinion and expression, it obfuscates the influence structures and may create mistrust in the voting public.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 20
- Paragraph text
- Second, "citizen journalists" and bloggers and other media "non-professionals" engage in independent reporting and disseminate their findings through a wide variety of media, from print and broadcast to social media and other online platforms. They frequently work in ways similar or identical to, or even more rigorous than, the work of traditional journalists. Some States have adopted rules that provide important protection for them. For example, the Irish High Court, in Cornec v. Morrice and Ors, found that bloggers might claim source protection because they could constitute an "organ of public opinion" and because the right to influence public opinion would be jeopardized if they were forced to disclose their sources.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 9
- Paragraph text
- Three considerations deserve emphasis. First, to be necessary, a restriction must protect a specific legitimate interest from actual or threatened harm that would otherwise result. As a result, general or vague assertions that a restriction is necessary are inconsistent with article 19. However legitimate a particular interest may be in principle, the categories themselves are widely relied upon to shield information that the public has a right to know. It is not legitimate to limit disclosure in order to protect against embarrassment or exposure of wrongdoing, or to conceal the functioning of an institution.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 10
- Paragraph text
- Second, under the well-accepted proportionality element of the necessity test, disclosure must be shown to impose a specific risk of harm to a legitimate State interest that outweighs the public's interest in the information to be disclosed. If a disclosure does not harm a legitimate State interest, there is no basis for its suppression or withholding (see general comment No. 34 of the Human Rights Committee, para. 30). Some matters should be considered presumptively in the public interest, such as criminal offences and human rights or international humanitarian law violations, corruption, public safety and environmental harm and abuse of public office. The importance of the public's interest has been emphasized repeatedly in other regional mechanisms. National laws relating to the right to information also commonly provide for a public interest analysis.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 45
- Paragraph text
- All of the principles identified above should apply in the context of national security, modified as appropriate according to the principles below. Full coverage means that no institution should be accorded such a wide measure of discretion as to eliminate the protections themselves. National security institutions enjoy secrecy as a norm of behaviour. Moreover, non-disclosure is often buttressed by a network of secrecy and espionage laws - often with harsh criminal penalties - that all but eliminate genuine whistle-blower protection, in particular by removing the whistle-blower's ability to advocate on the basis of the public's interest in the disclosed information. In those situations, States should rationalize their laws so that whistle-blower protections, and the public interest basis for them, apply regardless of the institution involved.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 48
- Paragraph text
- To satisfy the principle of proportionality, the relevant institution should also be prepared to show that the harm to the specific legitimate national security interest outweighs the public interest in disclosure. The Tshwane Principles propose that public disclosure should be protected where the internal or oversight mechanism would be ineffective, futile or lack timeliness in the face of a serious threat. Furthermore, reflecting a point of general applicability, the whistle-blower should disclose only the "amount of information that was reasonably necessary to bring to light the wrongdoing" and do so on the reasonable belief that the public interest in disclosure outweighed any harm to any specific and legitimate national security interest. Any disclosures that meet those tests should merit full protection. Those principles should be available to whistle-blowers whether they are claiming protection or defending themselves against investigation or prosecution.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- The question posed most sharply in the national security area is whether, when individuals assess the balance between public interest disclosure and national security harm, they should lose the protection they would otherwise enjoy if their assessment differs from that of the Government, as is likely. Criminal or civil penalties may advance the Government's interest in concealing certain information, but they do so at a steep cost to the public interest in ensuring that whistle-blowers do come forward to disclose instances of wrongdoing or other information that it is in the public's interest to know.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 57
- Paragraph text
- States should revise or establish, as appropriate, national laws and regulations to promote and protect the rights to privacy and freedom of opinion and expression. With respect to encryption and anonymity, States should adopt policies of non-restriction or comprehensive protection, only adopt restrictions on a case-specific basis and that meet the requirements of legality, necessity, proportionality and legitimacy in objective, require court orders for any specific limitation, and promote security and privacy online through public education.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Education
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 63
- Paragraph text
- The use of encryption and anonymity tools and better digital literacy should be encouraged. The Special Rapporteur, recognizing that the value of encryption and anonymity tools depends on their widespread adoption, encourages States, civil society organizations and corporations to engage in a campaign to bring encryption by design and default to users around the world and, where necessary, to ensure that users at risk be provided the tools to exercise their right to freedom of opinion and expression securely.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 6
- Paragraph text
- In paragraph 10 of its general comment No. 34 (2011) on article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression, the Human Rights Committee explained that any form of effort to coerce the holding or not holding of any opinion is prohibited. No one may be penalized, harassed, intimidated or stigmatized for holding an opinion. The right to hold opinions in a digital age is often subject to interference. For example, work product, journals and diaries stored on laptops and in the cloud are increasingly subject to attack (see A/HRC/29/32, paras. 19-21). Communications include allegations that individuals may be harassed at least in part because of their membership in an organization. Such harassment may amount to impermissible interference with opinion under article 19 (1), in addition to interference with the right to freedom of association under article 22 of the Covenant.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 7
- Paragraph text
- In contrast to the unconditional prohibition of interference with opinion, article 19 (3) of the Covenant imposes three requirements according to which States may restrict the exercise of freedom of expression. Those conditions are to be implemented narrowly (see Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 34, paras. 21-36). Article 19 (3) provides that the exercise of the right to freedom of expression involves special duties and responsibilities and may be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary: (a) for respect of the rights or reputations of others; and (b) for the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. Article 20 of the Covenant also provides for the prohibition of propaganda for war and any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 35
- Paragraph text
- The tools used to criminalize criticism are also applied against those who practise journalism, that is, the regular gathering of information, with or without formal training, accreditation or other government acknowledgement, with the intent to disseminate one's findings in any form. The attacks on reporting cross many themes in the present report. Nonetheless, it is important to emphasize that attacks on journalism are fundamentally at odds with protection of freedom of expression and access to information and, as such, they should be highlighted independently of any other rationale for restriction. Governments have a responsibility not only to respect journalism but also to ensure that journalists and their sources have protection through strong laws, prosecutions of perpetrators and ample security where necessary.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 36
- Paragraph text
- One of the gravest and most concerning tools against reporting involves the use of counter-terrorism laws to restrict and penalize reporters. The reliance on counter-terrorism serves as a catch-all to throttle the flow of information and justify the detention of journalists, bloggers and others working in the media. In Australia, the Border Force Act of 2015 allegedly has the effect of criminalizing reporting on the detention conditions in immigration detention facilities. Ethiopia reportedly relied on its Criminal Code and the Anti-Terrorism Proclamation of 2009 to detain journalists and bloggers with the "Zone 9" collective on the grounds of "working with foreign human rights organizations and inciting violence through social media to create instability in the country", when in fact they were working for independent online media. Turkish authorities have allegedly used anti-terrorism laws to detain journalists and target academics. In 2014, Nigeria was also criticized for threatening and harassing nearly a dozen independent newspapers under the guise of fighting terrorism.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 37
- Paragraph text
- The Islamic Republic of Iran has repeatedly detained journalists and bloggers on murky charges pertaining to espionage or "conspiracy against national security" - problems exacerbated by the closed nature of legal proceedings against those detained. In Germany, while the Government swiftly and correctly reversed course, two online journalists were investigated for reporting on government surveillance practices on the grounds of protecting the public prosecutor's ability to pursue cases against extremism. A presidential decree in Ukraine imposed a one-year ban on 41 foreign journalists and bloggers who were said to pose a threat to the country's national interests and sovereignty. Indonesia detained journalists reporting on the situation in West Papua, charging them with misuse of their visas and attempted treason.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Movement
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 50
- Paragraph text
- While the threats to freedom of expression worldwide are severe, there remain important efforts to sustain a commitment to article 19. In the wake of the attacks in Paris in January 2015, dozens of the highest leaders of States gathered for a public demonstration that was, nominally, to support the right to freedom of expression and oppose terrorism. The moment proved to be as much theatre as commitment to law and policy, as no overarching Government-led effort to promote freedom of expression - such as the protection of journalists and artists - followed. Still, one may point to concrete examples that deserve to be emulated. Importantly, many (if not most) Governments proclaim in their Constitutions the right everyone enjoys to freedom of expression. Egypt's is typical, protecting in article 65 the freedom of expression "verbally, in writing, through imagery, or by any other means of expression and publication".
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 74
- Paragraph text
- Governments increasingly require private entities providing telecommunications and Internet service to comply with censorship demands. In addition to network filtering practices, States compel or pressure companies to shut down networks or block entire services. This trend requires further documentation and scrutiny. Future work will examine laws, policies and extralegal measures that enable Governments to undertake such restrictions, and the costs and consequences of such restrictions. The Special Rapporteur will also examine the responsibilities of companies to respond to such measures in a way that respects rights, mitigates harm and provides avenues for redress where abuses occur.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 75
- Paragraph text
- Private actors face substantial pressures from Governments and individuals to restrict expression deemed to constitute extremism or hatred, hostility or harassment. Private actors may also themselves aim to foster what they perceive to be civil discourse on their platforms, regulate access through real-name requirements and other registration policies, or feature or prioritize certain content for business reasons. Future work will evaluate the potential of State abuse of private initiatives, the impact of private measures on freedom of expression, and the relevant human rights obligations and responsibilities. This reporting will not only focus on the roles of social media and search engines, but also lesser known actors such as e-commerce and financial intermediaries.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 52
- Paragraph text
- States have also attempted to combat anonymity tools, such as Tor, proxies and VPNs, by denying access to them. China has long blocked access to Tor, and Russian government officials reportedly offered more than $100,000 for techniques to identify anonymous users of Tor. In addition, Ethiopia, Iran (Islamic Republic of) and Kazakhstan have reportedly sought to block Tor traffic. Because such tools may be the only mechanisms for individuals to exercise freedom of opinion and expression securely, access to them should be protected and promoted.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 30
- Paragraph text
- Some States directly penalize individuals on no other ground than the prohibition of criticism itself. Viet Nam, for instance, has reportedly detained and prosecuted individuals on the grounds of "propaganda against the State". Similarly, the Islamic Republic of Iran has detained and prosecuted individuals for conducting "propaganda against the system" and "insulting" the nation's highest leadership. Activists in Azerbaijan have been detained and prosecuted on grounds of treason following comments critical of the President. Kuwaiti authorities prosecuted a journalist on the grounds of insulting the judiciary, on the basis of tweets and posts in which he raised concerns about the sentencing of others. Nepalese authorities brought contempt charges against news journalists following their critical reports on the judiciary. Bahraini authorities prosecuted an activist for criticizing torture and ill-treatment in a Bahraini prison. Myanmar has penalized individuals for criticism or insult of the army, while Cambodia has prosecuted and harassed individuals for their criticism of government policy.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 46
- Paragraph text
- The right to freedom of opinion and expression must be respected "without distinction of any kind" (see article 2 (1) of the Covenant). Members of some groups, however, often face particular discrimination when it comes to the implementation of restrictions on expression. The Special Rapporteurs on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, on the situation of human rights defenders and on the independence of judges and lawyers address issues pertaining to human rights defenders and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), often in collaboration with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. Given their focus and detailed reporting, I will not highlight here our shared concerns about restrictions imposed against NGOs, human rights defenders environmental activists, refugees and lawyers. Instead I will highlight several other groups whose expression is particularly subject to repression.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Environment
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 57b
- Paragraph text
- [Among steps that I would encourage are the following:] Engage with special procedures of the Human Rights Council. As has been shown in the present report, while the response rate to communications is quite low, several States engage with the mandate holder in good faith. Engagement with communications and invitations to conduct country missions add significant value to the work of the mandate holder, since they allow us to seek an understanding of why States pursue certain policies (and, where those policies are adverse to freedom of expression, a possibility of encouraging officials to adopt other measures);
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 57d
- Paragraph text
- [Among steps that I would encourage are the following:] Support independent media and civic space. In the face of State repression of reporting, it is critical that States make an extra effort to support independent voices in the media and civil society at large. At a minimum, I encourage States to avoid imposing restrictions on reporting and research that may be seen to criticize the Government and its policies or to share information about sensitive subjects, including terrorism. States should especially avoid imposing obstacles, such as accreditation procedures or penalties through defamation lawsuits or intermediary liability, that undermine independent media. At the same time, those with the means - such as private donors and foundations - should make a special effort to support independent media and to foster strong scrutiny of media conglomerations that squeeze out the less well-financed outlets;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 85
- Paragraph text
- States bear a primary responsibility to protect and respect the right to exercise freedom of opinion and expression. In the information and communication technology context, this means that States must not require or otherwise pressure the private sector to take steps that unnecessarily or disproportionately interfere with freedom of expression, whether through laws, policies, or extralegal means. Any demands, requests and other measures to take down digital content or access customer information must be based on validly enacted law, subject to external and independent oversight, and demonstrate a necessary and proportionate means of achieving one or more aims under article 19 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Particularly in the context of regulating the private sector, State laws and policies must be transparently adopted and implemented.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 46
- Paragraph text
- States often block and filter content with the assistance of the private sector. Internet service providers may block access to specific keywords, web pages or entire websites. On platforms that host content, the type of filtering technique depends on the nature of the platform and the content in question. Domain name registrars may refuse to register those that match a government blacklist; social media companies may remove postings or suspend accounts; search engines may take down search results that link to illegal content. The method of restriction required by Governments or employed by companies can raise both necessity and proportionality concerns, depending on the validity of the rationale cited for the removal and the risk of removal of legal or protected expression.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 27
- Paragraph text
- Technical standards and processes ensure that the infrastructure, networks and applications that comprise Internet and telecommunication networks operate seamlessly. The physical infrastructure on which Internet traffic flows, such as network cables and satellites, are set up and run according to various technical requirements that ensure their smooth functioning. Organizations that develop such requirements include the International Telecommunication Union, which sets standards for the interoperability of telecommunication networks; the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, a professional association which develops standards for Wi-Fi transmission; and the Groupe Speciale Mobile Association, a private international association of the mobile industry which develops standards for mobile networks.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 66
- Paragraph text
- Ongoing debate about the minimum standards for corporate disclosures and relevant best practices reflects uncertainty about the appropriate balance between transparency and competing values, such as individual security and trade secrecy. While there is growing consensus that corporations should disclose information about how restrictions are interpreted and enforced, there is less agreement about how this should be done. Similarly, there is widespread agreement about the importance of quantitative transparency, but it is less clear how such information should be contextualized, presented and made accessible.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 46
- Paragraph text
- Some States may identify the mere use of encryption technologies as illicit behaviour. For instance, charges against the Zone 9 blogger collective in Ethiopia included suggestions that the mere training in communication security was evidence of criminal behaviour. Such presumptions fail to meet the standards for permissible restrictions. Similarly, States undermine the rights to privacy and freedom of expression when they penalize those who produce and distribute tools to facilitate online access for activists.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 53
- Paragraph text
- Anonymous speech has been necessary for activists and protestors, but States have regularly attempted to ban or intercept anonymous communications in times of protest. Such attempts to interfere with the freedom of expression unlawfully pursue an illegitimate objective of undermining the right to peaceful protest under the Universal Declaration and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
Hate speech and incitement to hatred 2012, para. 26
- Paragraph text
- In Europe, there have been instances of incitement to racial hatred against Roma; acts of violence perpetrated by neo-Nazi groups against non-European minorities; violence in several countries following the publication of cartoons featuring the Prophet Muhammad by the Jyllands-Posten newspaper in Denmark; and the release of an online film, Fitna, by a member of the parliament of the Netherlands, in which Muslims were associated exclusively with violence and terrorism.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Hate speech and incitement to hatred 2012, para. 60
- Paragraph text
- Lastly, in several instances, it has been found that legislators and judges are unaware of international human rights treaties and the nature of State obligations, including article 20 of the Covenant. Where such lacunae exist, it is important to review the legal education system to redress the situation, including by providing training for judges on the thresholds of incitement to hatred. Law enforcement officers may also benefit from such initiatives.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Education
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 24
- Paragraph text
- E-commerce facilitates the sale of goods and services and other commercial transactions among businesses and consumers, businesses and other businesses, or consumers and other consumers. The ways in which companies provide access to, promote, or arrange these transactions, and safeguard the wealth of personal information generated by these transactions, may implicate the freedom of expression and privacy of their customers.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Hate speech and incitement to hatred 2012, para. 90
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur also calls upon media professionals to abide by high ethical and professional standards of journalism to fulfil their role of informing society with accurate facts. He therefore encourages media professionals and media outlets to adopt and adhere to voluntary codes of ethics and professionalism and to establish self-regulatory bodies.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 40
- Paragraph text
- Outright prohibitions on the individual use of encryption technology disproportionately restrict the freedom of expression, because they deprive all online users in a particular jurisdiction of the right to carve out private space for opinion and expression, without any particular claim of the use of encryption for unlawful ends.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 83b
- Paragraph text
- [Legal frameworks must ensure that communications surveillance measures:] Are strictly and demonstrably necessary to achieve a legitimate aim; and
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 10
- Paragraph text
- A key feature of the digital age is that technology changes incessantly to sate user demands. Although the present report refers to contemporary technologies that facilitate encryption and anonymity, its analysis and conclusions apply generally to the concepts behind the current technologies and should be applicable as new technologies replace the old.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 67
- Paragraph text
- Restrictions on freedom of expression online occur on a daily basis and frequently involve corporate conduct, whether compelled by law or pursuant to corporate policy and practice (for example, as reflected in terms of service). Common examples of such restrictions include unlawful or otherwise questionable content removals, service restrictions and account suspensions, and data security breaches.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- To be sure, States enjoy legitimate interests apart from those identified in article 19 (3), such as those economic, diplomatic and political. Human rights law does not preclude States from pursuing such objectives. Article 19 merely provides that pursuit of those other objectives must involve measures that do not restrict the exercise of freedom of opinion and expression.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 81
- Paragraph text
- Throughout this future work, the Special Rapporteur will pay particular attention to legal developments (legislative, regulatory, and judicial) at national and regional levels. In this context, he alerts all stakeholders to his interest in gathering such materials for future communications and reporting and encourages interested parties to collect and provide such material throughout the course of this work.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 84
- Paragraph text
- Even though this project is at its early stages, it is nonetheless critical that States and private actors take steps to ensure respect for the freedom of opinion and expression. These steps should include, at a minimum, the following, with further analysis to follow throughout the Special Rapporteur's mandate.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 13
- Paragraph text
- Finally, the responsibility to respect involves attention to the availability of remedies - from moral remedies to compensation and guarantees of non-repetition - when the private actor has caused or contributed to adverse impacts.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 19
- Paragraph text
- Internet addresses (that is, uniform resource locators (URLs)) are allocated and sold by domain name registries and registrars, under the supervision of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a non-profit entity. Currently, the world's largest registrar hosts more than 61 million domain names.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 80
- Paragraph text
- In conclusion, the Special Rapporteur provides the following recommendations.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 73
- Paragraph text
- Among the Special Rapporteur's priorities for thematic study and guidance are the following:
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 47
- Paragraph text
- However, the Special Rapporteur would like to emphasize that, despite the changing nature of armed conflicts today, there are sufficient protection guarantees for journalists under existing legal standards, as outlined below.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 8
- Paragraph text
- Internet and telecommunications shutdowns involve measures to intentionally prevent or disrupt access to or dissemination of information online in violation of human rights law (see A/HRC/32/13, para. 10). Governments typically conduct or order shutdowns, often with the assistance of private actors that operate networks or facilitate network traffic. Large-scale attacks on network infrastructure committed by private parties, such as distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, may also have shutdown effects. While shutdowns are frequently associated with total network outages, they may also arise when access to mobile communications, websites or social media and messaging applications is blocked, throttled or rendered “effectively unusable”. Shutdowns may affect towns or regions within a country, an entire country or even multiple countries and may last for periods ranging from hours to months.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 10
- Paragraph text
- Shutdowns ordered pursuant to vaguely formulated laws and regulations also fail to satisfy the legality requirement. In Tajikistan, the amended Law on the State of Emergency authorizes the Government to block mobile services and Internet access without a court order following the declaration of a state of emergency. The law fails to define when and for what purposes a state of emergency may be declared. Such ambiguity enables authorities’ unfettered discretion to implement shutdowns. In some countries, authorities rely on antiquated laws to justify shutdowns. Laws and regulations adopted and implemented in secret also violate the legality requirement. In the United States of America, the National Coordinating Center for Telecommunications has largely redacted public release of standard operating procedure 303, an executive regulation that establishes “detailed procedures” on the “disruption of cellular service.” While these procedures have not been publicly invoked, the potential for authorities to evade legal scrutiny and public accountability runs contrary to article 19 of the Covenant.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 11
- Paragraph text
- Restrictions on expression must be necessary to achieve aims specified by article 19 (3) of the Covenant and may never be invoked to justify the suppression of advocacy for democratic rights (see Human Rights Committee general comment No. 34, para. 23; and A/71/373, para. 26). However, governments frequently impose shutdowns during demonstrations, elections and other events of extraordinary public interest, with little or no explanation. In Bahrain, disruptions to mobile and Internet access in Duraz allegedly coincided with sit-ins outside the home of a prominent religious leader whose citizenship the Government had revoked. Internet users in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela were reportedly denied Internet access during widespread protests against the Government in 2014. Network disruptions have been recorded during or around elections or protests in Cameroon, the Gambia, India, Myanmar, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Uganda and Montenegro.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 69
- Paragraph text
- Like any decision to bring legal proceedings, companies may take into account a range of considerations, such as the “potential beneficial [human rights] impact, the likelihood of success, the severity of the case, cost, the representativeness of the case and whether the case is part of a larger trend”. However, companies should assign substantial overall weight to human rights considerations in their decision-making processes and carefully assess both the potential benefits and risks to human rights. For example, companies should be inclined to challenge overbroad requests where there is a reasonable likelihood of success, even if these challenges might be resource intensive; on the other hand, companies might pursue alternative options if a challenge is likely to create adverse precedent or backlash and undermine expression and privacy.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 53
- Paragraph text
- Companies should develop clear and specific criteria for identifying activities that implicate freedom of expression and trigger due diligence processes. The company’s past and ongoing human rights effects, as well as industry practice, provide useful indicators. In the digital access industry, such activities might include mergers and acquisitions; market entry or exit; government or non-government requests for content restriction or user data; the development of or changes to content restriction and privacy policies; product changes regarding content moderation or encrypted communications; arrangements that facilitate prioritized access to Internet content and applications; the design, sale and purchase of network interception and filtering equipment and technologies as well as associated training and consultation services. This list, which is far from exhaustive, “requires constant vigilance and updating”, taking into account new areas of business, developments in technology, and other changes in operating context.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 76
- Paragraph text
- Individuals depend on digital access to exercise fundamental rights, including freedom of opinion and expression, the right to life and a range of economic, social and cultural rights. They also regularly face obstacles to access: from shutdowns to surveillance. The present report is largely concerned with the obstacles that deny, deter or exclude expression through blunt reliance on digital censorship. The present report has not addressed other serious obstacles — such as the lack of adequate connectivity infrastructure, high costs of access imposed by government, gender inequality, and language barriers — that also may constitute forms of censorship. Much of it therefore focuses on the roles and obligations of States. But States increasingly exercise censorship through the private sector. The report has aimed not only to address the constraints on State action under human rights law but also the principles that private actors should observe in respecting human rights. Key recommendations, already highlighted in the analysis above, are set out below.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Gender
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 78
- Paragraph text
- It is also critical for the Council and States to draw the connections between privacy interference and freedom of expression. To be sure, interferences with privacy must be assessed on their own merits under article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other norms of human rights law. But certain interferences — such as overbroad requests for user data and third party retention of such data — can have both near- and long-term deterrent effects on expression, and should be avoided as a matter of law and policy. At a minimum, States should ensure that surveillance is authorized by an independent, impartial and competent judicial authority certifying that the request is necessary and proportionate to protect a legitimate aim.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 82
- Paragraph text
- For years now, individuals and companies within the digital access sector have understood that they play an essential role in the vast expansion of access to information and communications services. They are in a business in which the model for success should involve expanding access, efficiencies, diversity and transparency. They should take the principles identified in the present report as tools to strengthen their own roles in advancing users’ rights to freedom of expression. In this spirit, in addition to high-level policy commitments to human rights, the industry should allocate appropriate resources towards the fulfilment of these commitments, including due diligence, rights-oriented design and engineering choices, stakeholder engagement, strategies to prevent or mitigate human rights risks, transparency and effective remedies. In doing so, the design and implementation of corporate human rights accountability measures should draw on both internal and external expertise, and ensure meaningful input from customers and other affected rights holders, civil society and the human rights community.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 4
- Paragraph text
- There is evidently no formal process according to which a member of the public, let alone a special rapporteur, may seek such information from the United Nations. As a result, even if an intergovernmental organization has a good case for non-disclosure in a particular situation, that argument is not tested (see ST/SGB/2007/6). To address this point one must ask how are institutional decisions and analyses, and decision makers, to be put to the test when such information is so difficult to obtain? Instead of a formal process that would enable the submission of requests for information, public knowledge of the policies and actions of the United Nations and of other intergovernmental organizations is limited to only what those bodies choose to publish, while external evaluation typically depends on the efforts of journalists or researchers who develop access within such organizations. Within the United Nations, and most intergovernmental organizations, there appears to be no obligation on the part of any official source to provide reasons for refusing to disclose information.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 12
- Paragraph text
- In the years since, elaboration of the right to information has been a common thread in reporting under the mandate. In 2013, the Special Rapporteur gave a full rationale for a robust right to information: “… public authorities act as representatives of the public, fulfilling a public good; therefore, in principle, their decisions and actions should be transparent. A culture of secrecy is acceptable only in very exceptional cases, when confidentiality may be essential for the effectiveness of their work. There is consequently a strong public interest in the disclosure of some types of information. Moreover, access to certain types of information can affect the enjoyment by individuals of other rights. In such cases, information can be withheld only in very exceptional circumstances, if at all (A/68/362, para. 20).”
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 14
- Paragraph text
- In parallel with the work of the Human Rights Committee and its special procedures mechanisms, the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly also articulated the importance of freedom of information. As recently as 2016, the Council called upon all States to ensure disclosure of information held by public authorities and “to adopt transparent, clear and expedient laws and policies that provide for the effective disclosure of information held by public authorities and a general right to request and receive information, for which public access should be granted, except within narrow, proportionate, necessary and clearly defined limitations”. Access to information has become a standard element of other human rights treaties (A/70/361, para. 6), and has been widely adopted in international agreements pertaining to development, the environment, food and agriculture and corruption, among other substantive areas. The Aarhus Convention provides an example of international agreement that access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters, an area of major public interest, “contribute[s] to the protection of the right of every person of present and future generations to live in an environment adequate to his or her health and well-being”. Similarly, in recognition of the essential role played by the right to freedom of information, Sustainable Development Goal 16 links access to information to good governance, human rights and accountability and calls on all Member States to adopt and implement public access to information laws and policies (resolution 70/1, paras. 16.6-16.10).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 53
- Paragraph text
- Third, the United Nations whistle-blower policy provides that: “The individual must make the report in good faith and must submit information or evidence to support a reasonable belief that misconduct has occurred” (ST/SGB/2017/2, para. 2.1 (a)). In the context of whistle-blowing, a “good faith” requirement should not require justification other than the fact that the whistle-blower aims to disclose waste, fraud, abuse or some other illegal conduct. It should not be understood to require or permit any kind of inquiry into other motives that the whistle-blower may have.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 20
- Paragraph text
- The media coverage of intergovernmental organizations is also radically different from the day-to-day or hour-to-hour reporting in domestic environments. Considering the size of the international bureaucracy, in comparison to the coverage in robust media environments of national or local governance, very few reporters cover the United Nations or other intergovernmental organizations on a dedicated basis. Those who do cover them must often work hard to get their editors, and certainly their readers, to understand the relevance of these institutions to their own lives and public policy preferences. As a result, members of the international civil service do not find themselves under the journalistic microscope in the same way that domestic bureaucrats do (or should) around the world. Such oversight may be pursued by Member States from time to time, particularly in areas of budgeting, but the difficulty of accessing information about the workings of intergovernmental organizations exacerbates the already difficult situation in terms of the pursuit of accountability at the international level. In this kind of atmosphere, every newspaper or magazine article that uncovers a problematic practice on the part of an intergovernmental organization may be taken as an attack on the institution as a whole, largely because the work of these institutions is so removed from the lives of members of the public. Fixing that, and adopting robust access-to-information policies, is one step towards better understanding, accountability, oversight and protection of the missions of intergovernmental organizations.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 33
- Paragraph text
- While many of these initiatives are privately run, they sometimes collaborate with or receive support from States. For example, the Internet Watch Foundation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, which provides Internet service providers and hosting platforms with a "notice and takedown" service that alerts them to potentially criminal content on their networks, also provides law enforcement agencies with "unique data" in their investigations of such content.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 40
- Paragraph text
- Moreover, in situations where journalists find themselves in the territory of another State, the host State is also obliged to respect, protect and fulfil their rights, including their right to freedom of opinion and expression. This obligation also applies to an occupying power in situations of occupation, as well as forces of a State party acting outside its territory, such as forces constituting a national contingent of a State party assigned to an international peacekeeping or peace enforcement operation.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Movement
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 79d
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur proposes the following principles for determining the conditions that must be satisfied in order for a limitation or restriction on freedom of expression to be permissible:] Laws imposing restrictions or limitations must be accessible, concrete, clear and unambiguous, such that they can be understood by everyone and applied to everyone. They must also be compatible with international human rights law, with the burden of proving this congruence lying with the State;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 79e
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur proposes the following principles for determining the conditions that must be satisfied in order for a limitation or restriction on freedom of expression to be permissible:] Laws imposing a restriction or limitation must set out the remedy against or mechanisms for challenging the illegal or abusive application of that limitation or restriction, which must include a prompt, comprehensive and efficient judicial review of the validity of the restriction by an independent court or tribunal;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 79f
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur proposes the following principles for determining the conditions that must be satisfied in order for a limitation or restriction on freedom of expression to be permissible:] Laws imposing restrictions or limitations must not be arbitrary or unreasonable and must not be used as a means of political censorship or of silencing criticism of public officials or public policies;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 35
- Paragraph text
- All the various outlets of the mass media have a social role to play. Electromagnetic frequencies are a public good, and the Government should therefore guarantee access to them and should use them and authorize their use in an equitable and fair way for all sectors of society. It is recommended that an independent, national (public) agency be in charge of administering and managing the allocation of broadcasting frequencies.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 37
- Paragraph text
- Access to means of communication and, in particular, to electronic communications is now seen as necessary for achieving development and, therefore, should also be considered as an economic and social right. Governments should take responsibility for facilitating and subsidizing access to electronic media to ensure equitable enjoyment of this right, to combat poverty and to achieve their development goals.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- In accordance with the Special Rapporteur's mandate to mainstream women's human rights and a gender perspective in all his activities, this report reiterates the undeniable link between freedom of expression and women's human rights, which include the right to express their opinions, to have access to their own means of communication and to work in the existing mass media. The following considerations should be taken into account in this regard.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Gender
- Person(s) affected
- Women
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 43
- Paragraph text
- General comment No. 28 of the Human Rights Committee on the equality of rights between men and women (article 3 of the Covenant) states that the causes of the inequality of women throughout the world include traditional, historical, cultural and even religious factors. This situation also influences the enjoyment of and respect for all the rights enshrined in the Covenant, including the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to access information in order to make informed decisions.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- Men
- Women
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 75
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur notes that, despite the provisions of the Covenant, States frequently limit or restrict freedom of expression arbitrarily, sometimes by recourse to criminal legislation, in order to silence dissent or criticism. In view of such practices, the Special Rapporteur wishes to draw attention to some of the existing principles that may be used to determine whether or not a limitation or restriction to the right of freedom of expression is legitimate within the framework of existing standards.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 62
- Paragraph text
- Governments should take into account the ethnic, cultural, religious and ideological diversity of the various social groups. They should also promote and protect the languages of minorities and indigenous peoples by, inter alia, upholding their right to speak their own language and to propagate their culture and traditions, both in private and in public. In no case should restrictions on the freedom of expression be used to stifle minorities' and indigenous peoples' legitimate claims to their rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 98
- Paragraph text
- On this point, it should be noted that Security Council resolution 1738 (2006) condemns intentional attacks against journalists, media professionals and associated personnel in situations of armed conflict and calls upon all parties to put an end to such practices. It also urges all States to comply with the relevant obligations under international law to end impunity and to prosecute those responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 101
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur is concerned about the alarming and growing tendency to criminalize and institute legal proceedings against community-based communicators, who should also be considered journalists and media personnel, and should thus benefit from the same safeguards as all journalists, since a person's status as a journalist is determined by the work that he or she performs and is not subject to any job title or form of registration.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 105
- Paragraph text
- Freedom of opinion and expression is an individual and collective right which affords people the opportunity to issue, seek, receive and impart pluralistic and diverse information that enables them to develop their own lines of reasoning and opinions and to express them in any way they see fit. Freedom of expression is therefore exercised through two routes: the right to access information and the right to self-expression through any medium.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 114
- Paragraph text
- The right to freedom of opinion is absolute and may not be limited in any way, whereas the right to freedom is not absolute and may thus be subject to exceptional restrictions and limitations as defined in article 19, paragraph 3, and article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Such restrictions and limitations must be interpreted in accordance with international human rights law and the principles deriving therefrom.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 127
- Paragraph text
- States should empower women by upgrading their theoretical knowledge and practical skills, improving their access to information technology and promoting their participation in the development of these technologies as a means of fostering and increasing their participation in public affairs and decision-making on issues likely to have a direct bearing on their development.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Gender
- Person(s) affected
- Women
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and media freedom 2012, para. 104
- Paragraph text
- As part of their positive obligation to promote the right to freedom of expression, States should give full political support to strengthening media freedom and ensuring that independent, plural and diverse media can flourish. Any laws regulating the work of the media should adhere to the highest international standards on freedom of opinion and expression and allow uninhibited debate in the media, in line with principles of diversity and plurality.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and media freedom 2012, para. 109
- Paragraph text
- Journalists working both offline and online should be free to use diverse sources of information, including from those who do not wish to be identified. Journalists should never be forced to reveal their sources except for certain exceptional cases where the interests of investigating a serious crime or protecting the life of other individuals prevail over the possible risk to the source. Such pressing needs must be clearly demonstrated and ordered by an independent court.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and media freedom 2012, para. 62
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur has already examined issues related to the right to freedom of expression on the Internet (A/HRC/17/27) and citizen journalists (A/65/284), but remains concerned about the increasing risks against individuals who disseminate information via the Internet. The killing of Mexican reporter, Maria Elizabeth Marcias Castro, whose decapitated body was found near the city of Nuevo Laredo, along with a note saying she had been killed for reporting news on social media websites, is a case in point.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 70h
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur would like to highlight the joint work undertaken with the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) through a series of regional consultations held for the purpose of identifying and endorsing the principles that should underlie a democratic regulatory framework for community radio and television. Information on these principles is included in the annex. These principles are:] Competent authorities;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 70i
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur would like to highlight the joint work undertaken with the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) through a series of regional consultations held for the purpose of identifying and endorsing the principles that should underlie a democratic regulatory framework for community radio and television. Information on these principles is included in the annex. These principles are:] Licence and frequency allocation procedures;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 70j
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur would like to highlight the joint work undertaken with the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) through a series of regional consultations held for the purpose of identifying and endorsing the principles that should underlie a democratic regulatory framework for community radio and television. Information on these principles is included in the annex. These principles are:] Non-discriminatory conditions;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 70k
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur would like to highlight the joint work undertaken with the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) through a series of regional consultations held for the purpose of identifying and endorsing the principles that should underlie a democratic regulatory framework for community radio and television. Information on these principles is included in the annex. These principles are:] Evaluation criteria;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 45
- Paragraph text
- In a situation where law enforcement or national security arguments may justify requests for access to communications, authorities may see two options: order either decryption of particular communications or, because of a lack of confidence that a targeted party would comply with a decryption order, disclosure of the key necessary for decryption. Targeted decryption orders may be seen as more limited and less likely to raise proportionality concerns than key disclosure, focusing on specific communications rather than an individual's entire set of communications encrypted by a particular key. Key disclosure, by contrast, could expose private data well beyond what is required by the exigencies of a situation. Moreover, key disclosure or decryption orders often force corporations to cooperate with Governments, creating serious challenges that implicate individual users online. Key disclosure exists by law in a number of European countries. In both cases, however, such orders should be based on publicly accessible law, clearly limited in scope focused on a specific target, implemented under independent and impartial judicial authority, in particular to preserve the due process rights of targets, and only adopted when necessary and when less intrusive means of investigation are not available. Such measures may only be justified if used in targeting a specific user or users, subject to judicial oversight.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 5
- Paragraph text
- Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantee everyone's right to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers and through any media, including in the form of art. The Human Rights Council and the General Assembly have referred to freedom of expression as one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and one of the basic conditions for its progress and development (see Council resolution 21/12) and emphasized that a free media helps to build inclusive knowledge societies and democracies and foster intercultural dialogue, peace and good governance (see Assembly resolution 68/163). Both bodies have highlighted the critical importance of journalism in the above-mentioned resolutions and have affirmed that the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online, in particular freedom of expression (see Council resolutions 20/8, 26/13 and 32/13). Attacks on freedom of expression are nothing new, nor is the deep concern expressed about them by the United Nations (see Commission on Human Rights resolution 1993/45 and Council resolution 12/16). With 168 States parties and wide acknowledgement of its centrality in human rights law, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides the principal legal standard for the vast majority of communications relating to freedom of expression.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 40
- Paragraph text
- In addition to physical violence and attacks, journalists also face a range of punitive measures that threaten their well-being and livelihood. For example, Kuwait and Bahrain have reportedly sought to strip journalists of their citizenship simply for doing their job. In Ecuador, the Government has filed copyright complaints in an attempt to take down content critical of its activities. In my report to the General Assembly in 2015 (A/70/361), I also identified the ways in which sources for journalists are under threat.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 35
- Paragraph text
- In the course of his mandate, the Special Rapporteur has addressed, through communications and public statements, reports of violence against or harassment of journalists in Belarus, where it was reported that, in the lead-up to the December 2010 presidential elections, journalists had their equipment seized and photographs deleted; and in the Islamic Republic of Iran, where, as at May 2013, 40 journalists had reportedly been imprisoned as a means of silencing free speech and debate ahead of the June 2013 elections.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 53
- Paragraph text
- Some Governments have adopted strong policies and regulations to promote freedom of expression. In 2016, Norway launched an effort to place freedom of expression at the centre of its human rights policy. In 2015, the United States Federal Communications Commission adopted a policy of network neutrality following the adoption of similar policies by Governments, such as those of the Netherlands, Chile and Brazil. Several States have made an effort to expand infrastructure to improve Internet access. In Myanmar, the Government has taken significant steps to develop its Internet infrastructure: in June 2013, for example, it awarded operating licences to two foreign telecommunications companies as part of a broader push to deregulate the telecommunications industry. The United Republic of Tanzania, Rwanda and Mauritius were early adopters of digital broadcasting, thus providing "more opportunities to increase Internet access by freeing up unused spectrum". Of critical importance are the international statements of support for multi-stakeholder governance of the Internet that privileges security and openness and recognizes the value the Internet offers for freedom of expression. Several Governments have coordinated their efforts to expand Internet freedom through the Freedom Online Coalition and promote access to information through the Open Government Partnership. Several countries have adopted strong laws on the right to information and whistle-blower protection (see A/70/361).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 31
- Paragraph text
- The whistle-blower's motivations at the time of the disclosure should also be immaterial to an assessment of his or her protected status. Variation centres around the inclusion of "good faith" as an element of reporting, from the exclusion of a good faith requirement, to a good faith requirement only in the context of compensation as a remedy for retaliation, to inclusion of both "good faith" and reasonable belief. "Good faith," however, could be misinterpreted to focus on the motivation of the whistle-blower rather than the veracity and relevance of the information reported. It should not matter why the whistle-blower brought the information to attention if he or she believed it to be true. Irish law serves as a model, given that it provides that "the motivation for making a disclosure is irrelevant to whether or not it is a protected disclosure". Application of protection should focus on the public interest information underlying the whistle-blowing. Bosnia and Herzegovina, addressing that problem, seeks to protect against the risk of focusing on motivation by defining good faith as meaning the stance of the whistle-blower "based on facts and circumstances of which the whistle-blower has his or her own knowledge and which he or she deems to be true". In Zambia, the Public Interest Disclosure Act (2010) protects disclosures made by an employee in reasonable belief and limits the relevance of motivation to when a person discloses "for purposes of personal gain, excluding any reward payable in terms of any law".
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 60
- Paragraph text
- The use of an amorphous concept of national security to justify invasive limitations on the enjoyment of human rights is of serious concern. The concept is broadly defined and is thus vulnerable to manipulation by the State as a means of justifying actions that target vulnerable groups such as human rights defenders, journalists or activists. It also acts to warrant often unnecessary secrecy around investigations or law enforcement activities, undermining the principles of transparency and accountability.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 65
- Paragraph text
- In order to increase the storage of communications data that they are able to access, some States are adopting mandatory data retention laws requiring Internet and telecom service providers (collectively, "communications service providers") continuously to collect and preserve communications content and information about users' online activities. Such laws enable the compilation of historical records about individuals' e-mails and messages, locations, interactions with friends and family, etc.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- After reviewing domestic access to information policies and existing policies adopted by these and other institutions, as well as consulting with stakeholders and examining the related work of the previous Special Rapporteur, I have identified practices that intergovernmental organizations should include as part of their access to information policies.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- Although they vary in structure, all national right-to-information laws provide an appeals mechanism in the event of non-disclosure. Intergovernmental organizations should also ensure an independent appeals process, protected against political interference and with the competence to make binding decisions. Grounds for appeal should be broad and clear procedures should be in place, including timelines.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 54
- Paragraph text
- Fourth, the policy could be clearer about the channels that would-be whistle-blowers should and may use to report wrongdoing without fear of reprisal or to report actual cases of retaliation. The strength of the policy is clouded somewhat by its legalism; the United Nations should be undertaking significant outreach to ensure that all staff understand the appropriate channels.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 61b
- Paragraph text
- [The political bodies of the United Nations, especially the General Assembly and Human Rights Council, and other intergovernmental organizations should:] Ensure the development of monitoring and oversight functions;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 75
- Paragraph text
- Pre-existing policies and mechanisms could also be reformed or strengthened to address violations of freedom of expression. For example, a provider could make improvements to its content restriction policy and the training of its content moderation teams to reduce the likelihood of unfair website takedowns or overbroad content restrictions such as filtering. Customer complaint mechanisms could also be updated to allow users to flag network traffic management practices, commercial filtering classifications and other content restrictions they deem to be unduly restrictive or unfair.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 91
- Paragraph text
- States should be completely transparent about the use and scope of communications surveillance techniques and powers. They should publish, at minimum, aggregate information on the number of requests approved and rejected, a disaggregation of the requests by service provider and by investigation and purpose.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 96
- Paragraph text
- States must refrain from forcing the private sector to implement measures compromising the privacy, security and anonymity of communications services, including requiring the construction of interception capabilities for State surveillance purposes or prohibiting the use of encryption.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and media freedom 2012, para. 76
- Paragraph text
- Although the above examples of challenges and good practices relating to the protection of journalists in situations of widespread violence or impunity have been drawn from Latin America, this is not the only region in which these issues are a concern. The Special Rapporteur has sent communications to several countries regarding issues such as impunity, journalists reporting on violence and organized crime, as outlined in chapters II and III above.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Violence
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 50
- Paragraph text
- During times of conflict, journalists are at a heightened risk of being subjected to arbitrary detention and internment for alleged security reasons. In an international armed conflict, war correspondents, or representatives of the media who are accredited to, and accompany, the armed forces without being members thereof, are entitled to the status and treatment of a prisoner-of-war in case of capture. This is by virtue of the fact that they are formally authorized to accompany the armed forces and aim to keep the closest possible contact with the armed forces and thus inevitably share the fate of the armed forces. Hence, war correspondents benefit from all the protections of the Third Geneva Convention as supplemented by Additional Protocol I and customary international law. All other journalists who fall into the hands of a party to an international armed conflict benefit at least from the protections granted in article 75 of Additional Protocol I, which includes, inter alia, prohibition of violence to life, health or physical or mental well-being, humiliating and degrading treatment, and taking of hostages. They are also entitled to fair trial guarantees in the case of detention for penal offences. In addition, journalists in the hands of a party to the conflict or occupying power of which they are not nationals benefit from the protections granted by the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Fourth Geneva Convention).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Hate speech and incitement to hatred 2012, para. 32
- Paragraph text
- Many of the efforts that Governments are currently making to combat hate speech are, however, misguided. These include requests by Governments to intermediaries to screen and remove user content, registration requirements to identify users' real names and arbitrary blocking of websites. In addition, vaguely worded and ambiguous laws with disproportionate sanctions are frequently used to silence criticism and legitimate political expression, as highlighted in section II.C. While laws prohibiting incitement to hatred in accordance with international human rights law are necessary and required to tackle the phenomenon of hate speech, the human sentiment of hatred cannot be eliminated by legal prohibition alone, and the deterrent effect of such laws is not absolute, given that radical perpetrators often seek prosecution as a means to obtain access to the mainstream media to promote their ideas. Moreover, when an attempt to prosecute fails, for example where some forms of hate speech do not meet the threshold of incitement to violence, hostility or discrimination (such as bullying and offensive speech that do not incite any acts), there is a risk that that failure would be used as proof of endorsement of the speech, even though such speech merits condemnation. Furthermore, with regard to hate speech on the Internet, both the sheer volume of content posted every day and the cross-boundary nature of the medium considerably complicate effective implementation of the law.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 51
- Paragraph text
- In the case of non-international armed conflicts, there is no distinction between war correspondents and other journalists under international humanitarian law, and the protection for all journalists emanates from common article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II). This includes, for example, protection from violence to life, health and physical or mental well-being, including torture, hostage-taking, humiliating and degrading treatment, as well as threats to commit such acts. They are also entitled to fair trial guarantees (articles 4, 5, 6 of Additional Protocol II). The Special Rapporteur would like to emphasize that violations of most of these provisions are punishable as war crimes.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 22
- Paragraph text
- The credibility of the press is linked to its commitment to the truth and to the pursuit of accuracy, fairness and objectivity. Indeed, the Special Rapporteur is of the view that, by voluntarily upholding the highest standards of ethics and professionalism and ensuring their credibility in the eyes of the public, journalists can contribute to enhancing their own protection. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur welcomes various standards that have been developed and adopted by journalists, including the Declaration of Principles on the Conduct of Journalists, and the initiatives undertaken by the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) to encourage journalists to voluntarily adhere to the Declaration as a global standard of professional conduct.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 38
- Paragraph text
- The obligation to fulfil or to facilitate the enjoyment of the right to freedom of expression requires States to take positive and proactive measures, including, for example, allocating sufficient attention and resources to prevent attacks against journalists and taking special measures to address such attacks, including providing protection for journalists. It also encompasses the obligation to create conditions to prevent violations of the right to freedom of expression, including by ensuring that relevant national legislation complies with their international human rights obligations and is effectively implemented.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- In addition, States have an obligation to investigate threats and acts of violence against journalists promptly, thoroughly and effectively through independent and impartial bodies. Following investigations, States must ensure that those responsible are brought to justice so as to prevent impunity, and make reparation to individuals whose rights have been violated. The latter generally entails appropriate compensation and can involve, where appropriate, restitution, rehabilitation and measures of satisfaction, such as public apologies, public memorials, guarantees of non-repetition and changes in relevant laws and practices.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 41
- Paragraph text
- In sum, international human rights law guarantees the right to freedom of expression of all individuals, including journalists, as well as their right to life, liberty and security, among other rights. However, despite those existing norms and standards, attacks against journalists continue, as highlighted above (see paras. 24-31). The Special Rapporteur strongly emphasizes the need for States to abide by their international obligations by taking more effective action on the ground to ensure the effective protection of journalists, especially where there is a pattern of attacks against them.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur would like to underscore the key role that journalists play in situations of armed conflict, as they shed light on events unfolding on the battlefield, including potential abuses and violations of international human rights and humanitarian law committed by parties to a conflict. In the Randal case, the Appeals Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia noted that journalists working in war zones served "a public interest" because they "play a vital role in bringing to the attention of the international community the horrors and reality of conflict". In addition, in his report to the Security Council on the protection of civilians in armed conflict, the Secretary-General highlighted the important role of the media and information in the context of humanitarian operations, noting that the awareness of distant events allows informed assessment and helps humanitarian agencies to shape an appropriate response before going into a conflict area.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 43
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur recognizes that war reporting is inherently dangerous, as journalists are exposed to dangers arising from military operations and, instead of fleeing the combat zone, often seek proximity. In his most recent reports on the protection of civilians in armed conflict, the Secretary-General also expressed concern regarding the increasing number of journalists and media assistants killed or injured while reporting from areas of conflict, highlighting the fact that fatalities have resulted from excessive risk-taking, crossfire, or deliberate targeting by parties to a conflict. In addition, owing to their work, journalists are often suspected of being spies during armed conflicts and are either "eliminated" or used deliberately as "bargaining chips" by warring parties.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 27
- Paragraph text
- The importance of the right to freedom of opinion and expression for the development and reinforcement of truly democratic systems lies in the fact that this right is closely linked to the rights to freedom of association, assembly, thought, conscience and religion, and participation in public affairs. It symbolizes, more than any other right, the indivisibility and interdependence of all human rights. As such, the effective enjoyment of this right is an important indicator with respect to the protection of other human rights and fundamental freedoms.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 29
- Paragraph text
- Furthermore, freedom of opinion and expression, although an individual right in the broadest sense of its enjoyment, is also a collective right. It endows social groups with the ability to seek and receive different types of information from a variety of sources and to voice their collective views. This freedom extends to mass demonstrations of various kinds, including the public expression of spiritual or religious beliefs or of cultural values. It is also a right of different peoples, who, by virtue of the effective exercise of this right, may develop, raise awareness of, and propagate their culture, language, traditions and values.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 31
- Paragraph text
- The Human Rights Committee has emphasized the importance of the right of citizens to be informed of the activities of public officials and to have access to information that will enable them to participate in political affairs. In a democracy, the right of access to public information is fundamental in ensuring transparency. In order for democratic procedures to be effective, people must have access to public information, defined as information related to all State activity. This allows them to take decisions; exercise their political right to elect and be elected; challenge or influence public policies; monitor the quality of public spending; and promote accountability. All of this, in turn, makes it possible to establish controls to prevent the abuse of power.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 32
- Paragraph text
- Governments should take the necessary legislative and administrative measures to improve access to public information for everyone. There are specific legislative and procedural characteristics that any access-to-information policy must have, including: observance of the principle of maximum disclosure; the presumption of the public nature of meetings and key documents; broad definitions of the type of information that is accessible; reasonable fees and time limits; independent review of refusals to disclose information; and sanctions for noncompliance.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Key trends and challenges to the right of all individuals to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds through the Internet 2011, para. 37
- Paragraph text
- The four types of expression examined above (III.A) fall under the first category of the types of expression that constitute offences under international criminal law and/or international human rights law and which States are required to prohibit at the domestic level. However, as they all constitute restrictions to the right to freedom of expression, they must also comply with the three-part test of prescription by: unambiguous law; pursuance of a legitimate purpose; and respect for the principles of necessity and proportionality.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 34
- Paragraph text
- An important aspect of access to public information is access to historical information and archives and to information on current procedures that may shed light on human rights violations. Such access allows victims to exercise their right to truth, bearing in mind that the truth is the first step towards the right to justice and then the right to compensation, which are fundamental rights of victims. Victims not only have the right to establish the truth: why, how and who violated their human rights; they also have the right to make it public if they so wish, and this is particularly the case when they wish to honour the memory of those whose right to life has been violated.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 38
- Paragraph text
- Accordingly, the Special Rapporteur considers that, in order to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, the right of access to electronic communications and freedom of opinion and expression in general must be guaranteed. It is therefore necessary to reduce the digital divide and the gap in technological progress between developed and developing nations, in line with the recommendations contained in the Millennium Declaration (General Assembly resolution 55/2, para. 20). In particular, target 5 of goal 8 states: "in cooperation with the private sector, make available the benefits of new technologies, especially information and communications".
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Key trends and challenges to the right of all individuals to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds through the Internet 2011, para. 27
- Paragraph text
- As noted in the recently adopted general comment No. 34 on article 19 of the International Covenant by the Human Rights Committee, articles 19 and 20 of the Covenant are compatible with and complement each other, and the acts that are addressed in article 20 are all subject to restriction pursuant to article 19, paragraph 3. Hence, a limitation that is justified on the basis of article 20 must also comply with article 19, paragraph 3. Moreover, the Committee has clarified that what distinguishes the acts addressed in article 20 from other acts that may be subject to restriction under article 19, paragraph 3, is that for the acts addressed in article 20, the Covenant indicates the specific response required from the State: their prohibition by law. It is only to this extent that article 20 may be considered as lex specialis with regard to article 19.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Key trends and challenges to the right of all individuals to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds through the Internet 2011, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- There are two key elements of the type of expression that is prohibited under article 20, paragraph 2, of the International Covenant: first, only advocacy of hatred is covered, and second, it must constitute incitement to one of the three listed results. Thus, advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred is not a breach of article 20, paragraph 2, of the Covenant on its own. Such advocacy becomes an offence only when it also constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence; in other words, when the speaker seeks to provoke reactions (perlocutionary acts) on the part of the audience, and there is a very close link between the expression and the resulting risk of discrimination, hostility or violence. In this regard, context is central to the determination of whether or not a given expression constitutes incitement.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Key trends and challenges to the right of all individuals to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds through the Internet 2011, para. 68
- Paragraph text
- An increasing number of web services require high-speed Internet connectivity, in particular to access content on video-oriented websites. Thus, to effectively use the Internet, broadband access is increasingly becoming the norm. However, there is also a significant digital divide between those who enjoy fast access to multimedia content online and those still struggling with slow, shared dial-up links. The Special Rapporteur notes that, according to ITU, 24.6 per cent of inhabitants in developed States have access to fixed broadband Internet connection, versus 4.4 per cent in developing States.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Key trends and challenges to the right of all individuals to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds through the Internet 2011, para. 20
- Paragraph text
- Addressing child pornography online has become a major focus for regulation owing to the fact that the Internet has become the main gateway for the distribution of such content. The dissemination of child pornography is explicitly prohibited under international law, notably in the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography (defined in article 2 (c)). The Optional Protocol requires States parties to ensure that, as a minimum, producing, distributing, disseminating, importing, exporting, offering, selling or possessing child pornography (for purposes set out in article 3) are fully covered under its criminal or penal law, whether such offences are committed domestically or transnationally or on an individual or organized basis (article 3, para. 1 (c)).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Key trends and challenges to the right of all individuals to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds through the Internet 2011, para. 21
- Paragraph text
- Child pornography is therefore a clear exception to the rule, and dissemination of content via the Internet is legitimately restricted, and States are even required to prohibit it as a criminal offence. As noted by the Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography in her report to the Council at its twelfth session, the relevant legislation should be clear and comprehensive and should treat child pornography on the Internet as a grave violation of the rights of the child and as a criminal act. The Special Rapporteur considers that child pornography constitutes an act of violence against children and an offence to their human dignity, which provokes more violence against children. Moreover, the victim's privacy must be protected and appropriate protection measures and care adapted to the needs and characteristics of children must be available.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Key trends and challenges to the right of all individuals to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds through the Internet 2011, para. 58
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur underlines the importance of equal and effective access to the Internet for women, which can play a key role in promoting their empowerment. Indeed, as highlighted in the latest report by the Broadband Commission, the Internet promotes empowerment by connecting women to a wide range of resources, for example to improve health, bolster education, allow for informed decisions and pursue economic opportunities. In this regard, there is an ongoing research project in India, which focuses on how ICT, such as mobile phone services, can facilitate women's entrepreneurship in the country, and also seeks to identify factors which enhance the ability of technology to transform women's economic experiences.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Gender
- Person(s) affected
- Women
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Key trends and challenges to the right of all individuals to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds through the Internet 2011, para. 15a
- Paragraph text
- [Hence, the types of information or expression that may be restricted under international human rights law in relation to offline content also apply to online content. Similarly, any restriction applied to the right to freedom of expression exercised through the Internet must also comply with international human rights law, including the following three-part, cumulative criteria:] Any restriction must be provided by law, which must be formulated with sufficient precision to enable an individual to regulate his or her conduct accordingly and must be made accessible to the public;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Key trends and challenges to the right of all individuals to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds through the Internet 2011, para. 24
- Paragraph text
- Since the first conviction for the crime of incitement to commit genocide in 1998, this subject has become the focus of a substantial new body of jurisprudence. There are three defining requirements of the crime: it must be direct, public and committed with specific intent (mens rea). The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda has interpreted "direct and public" to include many forms of communication, by stating that "direct and public incitement must be defined … as directly provoking the perpetrator(s) to commit genocide, whether through speeches, shouting or threats uttered in public places or at public gatherings, or through the sale or dissemination, offer for sale or display of written material or printed matter in public places or at public gatherings, or through the public display or placards or posters, or through any other means of audiovisual communication".
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Key trends and challenges to the right of all individuals to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds through the Internet 2011, para. 81
- Paragraph text
- States are obliged to guarantee a free flow of ideas and information and the right to seek and receive as well as to impart information and ideas over the Internet. States are also required under international law to prohibit under its criminal law the following types of content: (a) child pornography; (b) direct and public incitement to commit genocide; (c) advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence; and (d) incitement to terrorism. However, the Special Rapporteur reminds all States that any such laws must also comply with the three criteria of restrictions to the right to freedom of expression, namely: prescription by unambiguous law; pursuance of a legitimate purpose; and respect for the principles of necessity and proportionality.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 26
- Paragraph text
- However, in many instances, States restrict, control, manipulate and censor content disseminated via the Internet without any legal basis, or on the basis of broad and ambiguous laws, without justifying the purpose of such actions; and/or in a manner that is clearly unnecessary and/or disproportionate to achieving the intended aim, as explored in the following sections. Such actions are clearly incompatible with States' obligations under international human rights law, and often create a broader "chilling effect" on the right to freedom of opinion and expression.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 40
- Paragraph text
- In other cases, intermediary liability is imposed through privacy and data protection laws. For example, a court in Italy convicted three Google executives for violating the Italian data protection code after a video depicting cruelty to a disabled teenager was posted by a user on the Google video service. Even though the video was taken down within hours of notification by Italian law enforcers, the judge found the Google executives guilty. The Government of China requires ISPs and web platforms to conduct surveillance on their users, and they are also held directly responsible for content posted by users. Companies that fail to comply with this obligation risk losing their business licences. Holding intermediaries liable for the content disseminated or created by their users severely undermines the enjoyment of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, because it leads to self-protective and over-broad private censorship, often without transparency and the due process of the law.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Adolescents
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- While blocking and filtering measures deny access to certain content on the Internet, States have also taken measures to cut off access to the Internet entirely. The Special Rapporteur is deeply concerned by discussions regarding a centralized "on/off" control over Internet traffic. In addition, he is alarmed by proposals to disconnect users from Internet access if they violate intellectual property rights. This also includes legislation based on the concept of "graduated response", which imposes a series of penalties on copyright infringers that could lead to suspension of Internet service, such as the so-called "three-strikes-law" in France and the Digital Economy Act 2010 of the United Kingdom.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 76
- Paragraph text
- In addition, while States are the primary duty-bearers of human rights, the Special Rapporteur underscores that corporations also have a responsibility to respect human rights, which means that they should act with due diligence to avoid infringing the rights of individuals. The Special Rapporteur thus recommends intermediaries to: only implement restrictions to these rights after judicial intervention; be transparent to the user involved about measures taken, and, where applicable, to the wider public; provide, if possible, forewarning to users before the implementation of restrictive measures; and minimize the impact of restrictions strictly to the content involved. Finally, there must be effective remedies for affected users, including the possibility of appeal through the procedures provided by the intermediary and by a competent judicial authority.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- However, while a notice-and-takedown system is one way to prevent intermediaries from actively engaging in or encouraging unlawful behaviour on their services, it is subject to abuse by both State and private actors. Users who are notified by the service provider that their content has been flagged as unlawful often have little recourse or few resources to challenge the takedown. Moreover, given that intermediaries may still be held financially or in some cases criminally liable if they do not remove content upon receipt of notification by users regarding unlawful content, they are inclined to err on the side of safety by over-censoring potentially illegal content. Lack of transparency in the intermediaries' decision-making process also often obscures discriminatory practices or political pressure affecting the companies' decisions. Furthermore, intermediaries, as private entities, are not best placed to make the determination of whether a particular content is illegal, which requires careful balancing of competing interests and consideration of defences.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Hate speech and incitement to hatred 2012, para. 71
- Paragraph text
- Regrettably, increased media concentration, the formation of media oligarchies and political ownership of media outlets have resulted in the erosion of media diversity and a focus on entertainment at the expense of news, current affairs and investigative journalism. According to the International Federation of Journalists, two thirds of all independently owned newspapers have disappeared since 1975. At the same time, investments by media houses in training journalists have also declined. Moreover, public media are less able to provide a counterweight to such trends because their online presence is not yet well established, they are subjected to budget cuts and they are losing their audience faster than commercial media, in particular among the younger generation.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Youth
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Hate speech and incitement to hatred 2012, para. 73
- Paragraph text
- Pluralism and diversity of views and opinions in mainstream media is another crucial element in ensuring equal participation in public debate by all communities in multicultural societies and in enabling their narratives and perspectives to become part of national debates. In Argentina, for example, part of the radio frequency spectrum is reserved for community media, so as to ensure access to the media for all. Training sessions and workshops for journalists on issues relating to diversity, including on how to build trust with underrepresented communities, can also significantly improve the quality of reporting and the portrayal of specific communities, such as migrants, who are often presented negatively as a security or economic problem. In addition to diversity in content and perspectives, pluralism in the media also requires diversity in the workforce of media professionals.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 72
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur remains concerned that legitimate online expression is being criminalized in contravention of States' international human rights obligations, whether it is through the application of existing criminal laws to online expression, or through the creation of new laws specifically designed to criminalize expression on the Internet. Such laws are often justified as being necessary to protect individuals' reputation, national security or to counter terrorism. However, in practice, they are frequently used to censor content that the Government and other powerful entities do not like or agree with.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 73
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur reiterates the call to all States to decriminalize defamation. Additionally, he underscores that protection of national security or countering terrorism cannot be used to justify restricting the right to expression unless it can be demonstrated that: (a) the expression is intended to incite imminent violence; (b) it is likely to incite such violence; and (c) there is a direct and immediate connection between the expression and the likelihood or occurrence of such violence.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Hate speech and incitement to hatred 2012, para. 27
- Paragraph text
- In Africa, there have been violent riots (for example, in Kenya, caused by alleged election-rigging and fuelled by tribal tension, and in Nigeria, on the basis of tribal tensions), leading to the deaths of several thousand people; attacks by Muslim villagers against Coptic Christians in Egypt; and various forms of incitement to violence and hatred on the basis of sexual orientation by politicians, the media and religious leaders in Uganda, as epitomized by the tragic killing of David Kato, whose name, photograph and description had been published by the Sunday Pepper newspaper in what it described as a "killer dossier".
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Hate speech and incitement to hatred 2012, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- Asia and the Middle East have seen killings of presidents of the Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan following a television broadcast during which two maulanas stated that the Ahmadiyya community was deserving of death; incitement by a Government-appointed imam in Saudi Arabia to eliminate all Shia believers in the world; incitement to and acts of violence against the Sufi community in Sri Lanka; increased radicalization and serious instances of incitement to racism in Israel against the Arab population, in addition to acts of violence by Jewish settlers against Muslims; and incitement to religious hatred against Jews in the occupied Palestinian territory.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 33
- Paragraph text
- The types of action taken by States to limit the dissemination of content online not only include measures to prevent information from reaching the end-user, but also direct targeting of those who seek, receive and impart politically sensitive information via the Internet. Physically silencing criticism or dissent through arbitrary arrests and detention, enforced disappearance, harassment and intimidation is an old phenomenon, and also applies to Internet users. This issue has been explored in the Special Rapporteur's report to the General Assembly under the section on "protection of citizen journalists" (A/65/284). Such actions are often aimed not only to silence legitimate expression, but also to intimidate a population to push its members towards self-censorship.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 34
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur remains concerned that legitimate online expression is being criminalized in contravention of States' international human rights obligations, whether it is through the application of existing criminal laws to online expression, or through the creation of new laws specifically designed to criminalize expression on the Internet. Such laws are often justified on the basis of protecting an individual's reputation, national security or countering terrorism, but in practice are used to censor content that the Government and other powerful entities do not like or agree with.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Hate speech and incitement to hatred 2012, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- In addition, any restriction imposed must be applied by a body that is independent of political, commercial or other unwarranted influences in a manner that is neither arbitrary nor discriminatory, and with adequate safeguards against abuse, including the right of access to an independent court or tribunal. Indeed, the risks that legal provisions prohibiting hate speech may be interpreted loosely and applied selectively by authorities underline the importance of having unambiguous language and of devising effective safeguards against abuses of the law.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Hate speech and incitement to hatred 2012, para. 43
- Paragraph text
- With regard to the prohibition of any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence established under article 20 (2) of the Covenant, it is important to establish a clearer understanding of the terms to prevent any misapplication of the law. This formulation includes three key elements: first, only advocacy of hatred is covered; second, hatred must amount to advocacy which constitutes incitement, rather than incitement alone; and third, such incitement must lead to one of the listed results, namely discrimination, hostility or violence. As such, advocacy of hatred on the basis of national, racial or religious grounds is not an offence in itself. Such advocacy becomes an offence only when it also constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, or when the speaker seeks to provoke reactions on the part of the audience.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Hate speech and incitement to hatred 2012, para. 44d
- Paragraph text
- [Moreover, attention is drawn to the following definitions that have been developed through consultations of experts and discussed at the OHCHR regional expert workshops on incitement:] Discrimination is understood as any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of race, colour, descent, national or ethnic origin, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, language, religion, political or other opinion, age, economic position, property, marital status, disability, or any other status that has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field of public life;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and media freedom 2012, para. 48
- Paragraph text
- The challenges that journalists encounter in undertaking their professional work are manifold. While the death or plight of foreign journalists in armed conflict situations frequently draw the attention of the international community, local journalists continue to face daily challenges in situations that have not reached the threshold of an armed conflict, but may be characterized by violence, lawlessness and/or repression. These range from restrictions to movement, including deportations and denial of access into a country or a particular area; arbitrary arrests and detention, particularly during public crises or demonstrations; torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including sexual violence against female journalists; confiscation of and damages to equipment, information theft, illegal surveillance and office break-ins; intimidation, including summons to police stations for questioning, harassment of family members, death threats, stigmatization and smear campaigns to discredit journalists; abductions or enforced disappearance to killings.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Families
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and media freedom 2012, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- Since 1 January 2011, the Special Rapporteur has addressed communications relating to instances of restrictions or violence against journalists to the governments of Angola, Azerbaijan, Belarus, China, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Georgia, Honduras, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Kazakhstan, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mexico, Morocco, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Russian Federation, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam and Yemen.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 57
- Paragraph text
- The right to privacy is guaranteed by article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The latter provides that "(1) no one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation; (2) everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks." Although "correspondence" primarily has been interpreted as written letters, this term today covers all forms of communication, including via the Internet. The right to private correspondence thus gives rise to a comprehensive obligation on the part of the State to ensure that e-mails and other forms of online communication are actually delivered to the desired recipient without interference or inspection by State organs or by third parties.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 59
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur notes that the right to privacy can be subject to restrictions or limitations under certain exceptional circumstances. This may include State surveillance measures for the purposes of administration of criminal justice, prevention of crime or combating terrorism. However, such interference is permissible only if the criteria for permissible limitations under international human rights law are met. Hence, there must be a law that clearly outlines the conditions whereby individuals' right to privacy can be restricted under exceptional circumstances, and measures encroaching upon this right must be taken on the basis of a specific decision by a State authority expressly empowered by law to do so, usually the judiciary, for the purpose of protecting the rights of others, for example to secure evidence to prevent the commission of a crime, and must respect the principle of proportionality.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 38
- Paragraph text
- By its resolution 65/196, the General Assembly proclaimed 24 March as the International Day for the Right to the Truth concerning Gross Human Rights Violations and for the Dignity of Victims, in recognition of the work and values of Monsignor Oscar Arnulfo Romero of El Salvador, who was killed in 1980. In his message on the day in 2013, the Secretary-General emphasized the individual and collective dimension of the right to truth, noting that each victim had the right to know the truth about violations against them, but that the truth also had to be told more widely as a safeguard to prevent violations from happening again.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 40
- Paragraph text
- In the context of human rights violations, and especially in cases of serious violations, the rights of victims and their families to access information can have several aspects. First, gaining access to information regarding the circumstances surrounding a human rights violation is usually essential in order to give effect to other rights, such as due process, guarantees to a fair trial and the right to a remedy. Moreover, clarifying what occurred is in itself one of the elements of reparations for victims and family members. Lastly, in cases of violations such as disappearances, the violation is continuing and ceases only once family members are able to ascertain the facts and determine the fate of the disappeared person. The refusal of the State to provide information, or the provision by it of false information, constitutes an additional violation because it prolongs and deepens the anguish, in addition to the moral and emotional pain.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Movement
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 70
- Paragraph text
- Over the past 20 years, numerous national norms have been adopted with the aim of promoting the right to access information. It is currently estimated that more than 50 national constitutions guarantee a right to information or of access to documents, or impose an obligation on State institutions to make information available to the public. More than 90 countries have adopted national laws establishing the right to request information and procedures for the public to obtain government-held information, thus responding to their human rights obligations.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 86
- Paragraph text
- There are also good practices regarding the appointment of dedicated officials to assist in the implementation of national laws on access to information. These can be established through the appointment of information officers, or the establishment of an office, such as the Mexican Federal Institute for Access to Information. Such mechanisms may undertake multiple functions relating to the promotion of access to information, such as processing requests, ensuring the proactive publication of information by public bodies, providing assistance to applicants, proposing adapted procedures to implement the law, training and raising the awareness of other officials, monitoring the implementation of the law, and reporting.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and media freedom 2012, para. 66
- Paragraph text
- According to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), in nine out of 10 cases in which journalists are murdered, the perpetrators go free. As at 20 March 2012, 565 journalists have been murdered with impunity since 1992. The root causes of impunity may vary from context to context, but can mainly be attributed to lack of political will to pursue investigations, including for fear of reprisal at the hands of powerful criminal networks, inadequate legal framework and a weak judicial system, ineffectiveness of police forces and judicial bodies and lack of expertise, lack of resources allocated to law enforcement and the justice system, as well as negligence and corruption. Against these obstacles, many journalists choose not to report threats or incidents of physical attack, further fuelling the cycle of impunity.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 22
- Paragraph text
- Notably, article 6 of the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (known also as the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders), adopted by the General Assembly in resolution 53/144, expressly provides for access to information on human rights, stating that everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, (a) to know, seek, obtain, receive and hold information about all human rights and fundamental freedoms, including having access to information as to how these rights and freedoms are given effect in domestic legislative, judicial or administrative systems; and (b) as provided for in human rights and other applicable international instruments, freely to publish, impart or disseminate to others views, information and knowledge on all human rights and fundamental freedoms.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to access information 2013, para. 76f
- Paragraph text
- [The core principles include:] Costs. Individuals should not be deterred by excessive cost from making requests for information;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 23
- Paragraph text
- First, restrictions must be provided by law made accessible to the public and be formulated with sufficient precision to enable an individual to regulate his or her conduct accordingly. Second, restrictions may be imposed only on the grounds set out in paragraphs 2 (a) and (b) of article 13, namely, for respect for the rights or reputations of others and for the protection of national security, of public order or of public health or morals. Third, restrictions must conform to the strict tests of necessity and proportionality.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 24
- Paragraph text
- Article 12 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child represents a unique provision in international human rights law. This is a right that only children have, not adults, since children do not have a general right expressly set out in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to express their views in all situations concerning them. That children are not always listened to justifies the inclusion in the Convention of a general right to be heard. The aim of article 12 is to address the legal and social status of children, who, on the one hand, lack the full autonomy of adults but, on the other, are subjects of rights (see CRC/C/GC/12, para. 1).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 27
- Paragraph text
- In accordance with article 12, States parties are obliged to recognize that right in their legal system, to adopt appropriate mechanisms to facilitate the active involvement of children in all actions and decision-making processes affecting them and to fulfil the obligation to give due weight to those views once expressed. The Committee on the Rights of the Child has noted that, while appearing to listen to children is relatively unchallenging, giving due weight to their views requires real change. According to the Committee, listening to children should not be seen as an end in itself, but rather as a means by which States make their interactions with children and their actions on behalf of children ever more sensitive to the implementation of children's rights (see CRC/GC/2003/5).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- The right to freedom of expression is often confused with the right to be heard set out in article 12. The Committee on the Rights of the Child considers that, while both articles are strongly linked, they articulate different rights and should not be confused. Article 12 relates to the right of expression of views specifically about matters which affect the child, and the right to be involved in actions and decisions that have an impact on the child's life. This provision imposes an obligation on States parties to adopt appropriate measures to facilitate the active involvement of children in all decisions and processes affecting them, and to fulfil the obligation to give due weight to those views, while freedom of expression requires no such engagement or response from States parties. The Committee considers, however, that the creation of an enabling environment for children to express their views freely also contributes to building children's capacities to exercise their right to freedom of expression (see CRC/C/GC/12, para. 81).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 29
- Paragraph text
- Another interesting aspect of article 12 relevant to freedom of expression is the emphasis on participation. Although the term is not found in the article, the Committee on the Rights of the Child has stated on various occasions that children's participation in society enables them to be heard, to be informed about public affairs and to play a role in the life of their country (see, for example, CRC/C/SR.379, para. 55). Participation should be encouraged within the family, at school and in society at large; it should concern political, social, economic and cultural life; and it should happen through existing institutions and through the creation of children-specific bodies. The rationale behind encouraging the children's participatory rights is to facilitate their development, given that children cannot be expected to mature into full members of society if they lack the experience of participating in school and community life (see, for example, CRC/C/SR.277, para. 50).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Education
- Equality & Inclusion
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Families
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- In this sense, restrictions on anonymity have a chilling effect, dissuading the free expression of information and ideas. They can also result in individuals' de facto exclusion from vital social spheres, undermining their rights to expression and information, and exacerbating social inequalities. Furthermore, restrictions on anonymity allow for the collection and compilation of large amounts of data by the private sector, placing a significant burden and responsibility on corporate actors to protect the privacy and security of such data.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 10
- Paragraph text
- Traditionally, the right to freedom of expression has not been associated with children, even though, as individuals, children benefit from all of the civil rights enunciated in the Covenant. Earlier international instruments dealing with children, such as the Geneva Declaration on the Rights of the Child of 1924 and the Declaration of the Rights of the Child (General Assembly resolution 1386 (XIV)), did not include any reference to this right, on the assumption that children were not able, because of their immaturity, to make meaningful choices. The Convention on the Rights of the Child marks a watershed in the protection of the rights and the inherent dignity of children. Unlike previous international legal instruments, the Convention promotes a dramatic shift in emphasis, from an approach based on the obligations of adults towards children (see the Declaration of the Rights of the Child) to one focusing on the child as a rights-holder.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 11
- Paragraph text
- The Convention on the Rights of the Child is the first international legal instrument proclaiming the right of children to freedom of expression. The wording of article 13 closely follows that of article 19, paragraphs 2 and 3, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. According to some, there is little value in article 13 itself, since it was simply "lifted" from article 19 of the Covenant with little attempt to apply it to children. However, read in conjunction with the provisions set out in articles 12 and 17 of the Convention, which protect the right to be heard and the right to have access to information, article 13 provides a level of protection to the child's right to freedom of expression that is comparable, if not superior, to that afforded by article 19 of the Covenant.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- Judicial systems often play a significant role in altering engrained authoritarian practices. There are as yet few examples of court decisions affirming children's right to freedom of expression and access to information. However, there is a growing number of examples within educational settings, especially in the United States. For example, a student at a Florida high school was banned from wearing any symbol of support for gay rights at school because the principal believed that any symbol featuring rainbows would make students picture gay people having sex. In a decision quoting the Tinker case mentioned above, a federal judge ruled in May 2008 that the school had violated the students' rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Education
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- LGBTQI+
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 57
- Paragraph text
- Campaigns initiated by children have generated important debates and brought benefits to society as a whole. Student unions often play a central role in articulating child-led advocacy initiatives: in 2011, for example, thousands of secondary school and university students in Chile protested against the exorbitant costs of education. The political impact of their mobilization continues to be felt in the ongoing debates on the Chilean education system. Similar student protests against the costs of education have occurred in multiple countries.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Education
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 14
- Paragraph text
- Although the wording of article 13 of the Convention generally follows that of article 19 of the Covenant, certain provisions are omitted. First, article 13 does not include the right to hold opinions without interference, provided in article 19, paragraph 1, of the Covenant. It may be reasoned, however, that this right is implied in article 13, paragraph 1, or covered either by article 12 or article 14 of the Convention. Secondly, article 13 does not include the first sentence of article 19, paragraph 3, of the Covenant: "The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities." The inclusion of this sentence, which was introduced in the Covenant because of the powerful influence of modern media of expression, was apparently not found necessary with regard to the child's freedom of expression.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 16
- Paragraph text
- The family, in particular, is regarded as one of the most important pillars in realizing the rights of the child to freedom of expression. It is widely acknowledged that parents assume the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of their child, and hold the child's best interests as a fundamental concern. The Committee encourages the implementation of a participatory family structure in which a child learns to freely express his or her views, and thus becomes equipped with the skills necessary to participate in society. The duty of family members includes the obligation to hear the child's views and take them seriously and to support children in the realization of their rights under the Convention (see CRC/C/43/3, paras. 999-1,002).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Families
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 18
- Paragraph text
- Seeking and accessing information is essential for the child's development and represents an essential precondition for participating in social life. Therefore, the Committee on the Rights of the Child has construed this right as imposing a positive obligation on States to provide access to information held by public authorities. The Human Rights Committee has observed that, to give effect to this right, States should make every effort to ensure easy, prompt, effective and practical access to information of public interest, and enact the necessary procedures, whereby one may gain access to information, such as by means of freedom of information legislation (see CCPR/C/GC/34, para. 19).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 47
- Paragraph text
- Undue restrictions on the child's right to peaceful assembly mirror some of the common obstacles to their freedom of expression. In a recent report, the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association noted: There may be safety concerns when young people participate in some public demonstrations. However, … laws such as that of Malaysia [where children under 15 years of age cannot participate in a public demonstration] are not tailored narrowly enough to specifically address that concern. Rather, a blanket ban on individuals of a certain age eliminates the right to participate in peaceful public assemblies for an entire portion of the population, without exception, contrary to article 15 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. (See A/HRC/26/29, para. 24.)
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Youth
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 55
- Paragraph text
- Many States have dispensed with the need for law enforcement agencies to return to the court for ongoing supervision after an interception order is issued. Under the Kenyan Prevention of Terrorism Act 2012, for example, interception of communications can be conducted over an indefinite period of time, without any requirement that law enforcement agencies report back to a court or seek an extension. Some States impose time limits on the execution of interception orders but enable law enforcement authorities to renew such orders repeatedly and indefinitely.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 16
- Paragraph text
- Changes in technology have been paralleled by changes in attitudes towards communications surveillance. When the practice of official wiretapping first commenced in the United States of America, it was conducted on a restricted basis, and was only reluctantly sanctioned by the courts. It was viewed as such a serious threat to the right to privacy that its use had to be restricted to detecting and prosecuting the most serious crimes. Over time, however, States have expanded their powers to conduct surveillance, lowering the threshold and increasing the justifications for such surveillance.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 41
- Paragraph text
- In addition to intercepting and tracking the content of individuals' communications, States may also seek access to communications data held by third party service providers and Internet companies. As the private sector collects progressively larger amounts of varied data that reveal sensitive information about peoples' daily lives, and individuals and businesses choose to store the content of their communications, such as voicemails, e-mails and documents, with third party service providers, access to communications data is an increasingly valuable surveillance technique employed by States.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 83
- Paragraph text
- Children may not have the same maturity as adults, but childhood is an evolving process during which maturity is gained gradually. The ability to develop opinions, as well as to express them clearly, stems from a learning process that begins at the earliest stages of our lives and that needs appropriate respect and encouragement to develop completely. If neglecting the duty to protect children from harm brings serious risks, so too does denying them space to develop their minds, critical thinking and opinions. Depriving children of information on certain matters and prohibiting their participation in public debate can only intensify their isolation and political alienation. Ensuring that children are able to exercise their right to be heard is not only an obligation: it is crucial to enhancing the effectiveness of protective measures.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Education
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 86
- Paragraph text
- States should revise national laws, regulations and policies that limit the right of children to express themselves, as well as to access information, to align them with international human rights standards. Any law limiting the freedom of expression of adults or children must also comply with the three established criteria for restricting this right, namely, prescription by an unambiguous law, pursuit of a legitimate purpose and respect for the principles of necessity and proportionality.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- Violations of the right to freedom of expression during electoral processes often take the form of State interference in media content. The adoption of laws to control or regulate political speech immediately before and during elections is an important concern in this regard. For example, a series of legislative measures in Azerbaijan, including the criminalization of "online slander or insults", reportedly had the effect of restraining the role of the media in the lead-up to the October 2013 elections. Violations of the right to freedom of expression also arise more broadly when existing laws are selectively interpreted or enforced by the State to crack down on specific forms of media content. Laws that are overly broad in scope and incorporate insufficient accountability mechanisms and protections against abuse are vulnerable to selective interpretation and enforcement.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 52
- Paragraph text
- States have taken a variety of approaches to paid political advertising. In some countries paid political advertising is a central pillar of political processes and is not strictly regulated. Other States, particularly those with a strong history of public broadcasting, have an outright prohibition of paid campaign advertising on radio and television. Some legal frameworks have taken a middle ground approach, putting in place financial limits on paid advertising spending, paired with rules on equitable pricing, timing, duration and scheduling of advertising. In other situations, it is the electoral authority which is mandated to allocate electoral publicity by channelling public funds to different contenders in proportion to previous election results, with basic minimum support assured for new parties.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- The importance of ensuring access to the media as part of the electoral process is also well-established in a number of regional human rights instruments. The South African Development Community Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections, for example, reiterate that, in the conduct of democratic elections, all political parties should have access to State media (principle 2.1.5). The same principle is enshrined in article 17 of the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance, on the importance of ensuring access by political candidates and parties to State-controlled media during elections. The Declaration of Principles of Freedom of Expression in Africa also affirms that "the public service ambit of public broadcasters should be clearly defined and include an obligation to ensure that the public receive adequate, politically balanced information, particularly during election periods" (art. VI).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 67
- Paragraph text
- Transparency of media ownership enables readers, viewers and voters to understand the structures of influence that underpin the campaign, advertising and editorial content that so often determine their political choices. States should find a way, either through regulatory policy or industry-led self-regulation processes, to promote greater transparency in media ownership and influence. The public has a right to know the identities of the corporate entities and individuals that influence the media sources upon which it relies for information during electoral processes. However, the requirement for transparency of private media ownership should not be used as a means of de facto media licensing.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 70
- Paragraph text
- Harassment of, and violence or threats against, journalists, bloggers or other members of the media, activists or political candidates or parties must be prohibited by law and subject to criminal penalties. Equally, as the Human Rights Council recognized in its resolution 21/12 on the safety of journalists, States must ensure accountability through the conduct of impartial, speedy and effective investigations into such acts and bring to justice those responsible, as well as ensuring that victims have access to appropriate remedies. Accountability mechanisms are the only way to ensure that such attacks do not occur with impunity, undermining not only the free expression rights of those involved, but the integrity of the electoral process. States should also ensure that legal frameworks protect the rights to peaceful assembly and association during electoral processes, and should eliminate any practical barriers to the conduct of protests and demonstrations.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 71
- Paragraph text
- In many States, electoral commissions are endowed with a range of responsibilities that are an essential guarantee against violations of the right to freedom of expression during electoral processes. Those responsibilities include election monitoring, the regulation of political funding, the provision of direct access to public broadcasting media and the monitoring of political speech. However, electoral commissions are often badly resourced and lack the necessary regulatory mandate and enforcement powers to fulfil their responsibilities and guarantee accountability and transparency in the electoral process. In order to ensure that electoral commissions are integral in a free, fair and accountable democratic process, States should ensure that they are given sufficient financial and human resources, and enforcement powers, to carry out their duties effectively and efficiently.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 83b
- Paragraph text
- [Accountability mechanisms are a crucial means of ensuring that regulatory frameworks are enforced and abuses of power are rectified. Impunity is a root cause of the lack of safety faced by journalists. In the context of promoting free expression during electoral processes, States should:] Guarantee the safety of journalists and media workers; legislative and policy measures must be adopted to prevent attacks against journalists and to eradicate impunity in relation to episodes of violence and intimidation;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 64
- Paragraph text
- Transparency and accountability around political financing are key to ensuring the fairness and integrity of elections. The Global Commission on Elections, Democracy and Security identified the regulation of uncontrolled, undisclosed or opaque political finance as one of five major challenges that must be overcome to conduct elections with integrity. Increasingly, States are setting limits on how parties may spend their funds, in order to reduce the costs of elections and minimize the potential for undue influence of donors on political candidates. Many States also require the disclosure of expenditure reports of parties and candidates, in order to promote public scrutiny and informed voting by citizens. Political finance reporting should be comprehensive, timely, available to the public and subject to stringent sanctions for inadequate disclosure or timeliness.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 65
- Paragraph text
- Political finance is a key concern when protecting and promoting the freedom of opinion and expression in electoral and political processes are being considered. Restraining campaign spending and creating an equal playing field for political parties and candidates are key to ensuring that citizens have access to a diverse range of opinions and political choices. At the same time, the provision of financial support to a political party may in itself be an act of political expression. A careful balance must therefore be struck by each State, reflecting local political values and legal frameworks, while at the same time conforming with international human rights norms. This would require, at a minimum, that States ensure that there is independent monitoring and oversight of political financing, and that every effort is made to ensure that organized crime is prohibited from using campaign financing as a means to gain political influence.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 19
- Paragraph text
- Two categories, for example, expand beyond officially recognized journalists. First, there are those who most closely reflect the professional engagement in collection and dissemination: members of civil society organizations who conduct research and issue findings, and researchers - academics, independent authors, freelance writers and others - who regularly participate in gathering and sharing information publicly. It is common for such people to adopt and publish methodologies that underscore the degree of professionalism upon which their work depends. Many non-governmental organizations are themselves publishers of well-sourced content that, in form and substance, is virtually identical to the work of the press, often the result of thorough research, in-the-field reporting and analysis. It is common for human rights researchers to rely upon sources who require confidentiality for safety. Recognizing a broad scope of protection, the European Court of Human Rights indicated that "non-governmental organisations, like the press, may be characterised as social 'watchdogs.' In that connection their activities warrant similar Convention protection to that afforded to the press". The Information Commissioner's Office in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland granted a non-governmental organization, Global Witness, an exemption from the national Data Protection Act because its work, and those of other non-media organizations, "constitutes a journalistic purpose even if they are not professional journalists and the publication forms part of a wider campaign to promote a particular cause". In Canada, a judge of the Superior Court of Quebec upheld a researcher's right to protect confidential information.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 8
- Paragraph text
- In adopting the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other measures, Governments did not preclude themselves from keeping certain kinds of information hidden from public view, but because article 19 promotes so clearly a right to information of all kinds, States bear the burden of justifying any withholding of information as an exception to that right. Article 19 (3) provides that any restriction on freedom of expression must be provided by law and be necessary to achieve one or more of the enumerated legitimate objectives, which relate to respect of the rights or reputations of others or to the protection of national security or of public order or of public health or public morals (see A/HRC/29/32, paras. 30-35). Limitations must be applied strictly so that they do "not put in jeopardy the right itself" (see Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 34, para. 21), a point that the Human Rights Council emphasized when it urged States not to restrict the free flow of information and ideas (see Council resolution 12/16).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 21
- Paragraph text
- Some authorities refer to a journalistic "privilege" not to disclose a source's identity, but both reporter and source enjoy rights that may be limited only according to article 19 (3). Revealing or coercing the revelation of the identity of a source creates disincentives for disclosure, dries up further sources to report a story accurately and damages an important tool of accountability. In the light of the importance attached to source confidentiality, any restrictions must be genuinely exceptional and subject to the highest standards, implemented by judicial authorities only. Such situations should be limited to investigations of the most serious crimes or the protection of the life of other individuals.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 30
- Paragraph text
- Protection mechanisms should promote disclosure and not require potential whistle-blowers to undertake precise analyses of whether perceived wrongdoing merits penalty under existing law or policy. Otherwise, the protection itself would be hollow, encouraging disclosure and signalling potential retaliation at the same time. In general, a reasonable belief requirement may encourage whistle-blowing based on thoughtful consideration of the facts known to a person at the time of disclosure. Whistle-blowers who, based on a reasonable belief, report information that turns out not to be correct should nonetheless be protected against retaliation.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 34
- Paragraph text
- When working properly, internal mechanisms provide a way for someone who perceives wrongdoing to seek a competent authority's investigation. They allow for timely attention by those who may be in the best position to address problems, while also providing a basis for balancing legitimate interests in secrecy and the redress of wrongdoing. However, internal mechanisms present potential whistle-blowers with serious risks. They often lack strong measures of confidentiality and independence from the organization in which they are embedded, putting whistle-blowers at risk of retaliation. Many mechanisms are widely perceived as ineffective, so that the risk of retaliation may appear too great in the face of low odds of success. For those reasons, among others, studies suggest that employees have relatively low confidence in whistle-blowing mechanisms. If States aim to have working whistle-blowing procedures that reduce public disclosure, they must ensure the effectiveness and trust in the full independence of whistle-blowing processes.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 35
- Paragraph text
- When whistle-blowers reasonably perceive that an internal process lacks effective redress and protection, they should have access to two other permissible avenues of disclosure. One would be external but not public, such as a government-wide ombudsman or oversight institution or a legislative oversight body. Belgium, Ireland, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea and the United Kingdom, among others, provide explicitly for various forms of external but non-public whistle-blowing. The legislation of Ghana provides for protected disclosures to nearly 20 categories of competent recipients apart from the whistle-blower's employer. At the same time, it is critical that, once a whistle-blower makes a disclosure outside his or her institution, the law does not hold the person to any pre-existing duties of confidentiality owed to the employer.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 36
- Paragraph text
- Whistle-blowers may reasonably perceive that neither internal nor oversight mechanisms provide effective protection or a likelihood of addressing wrongdoing. They may leave whistle-blowers exposed to retaliation and the absence of redress even if the formal legal framework and the mechanisms appear sufficiently protective. Whistle-blowers often reasonably doubt that such protections will work for them; the more a State can demonstrate that whistle-blowing results in changed institutional behaviour, individual accountability and protection, the more likely it is that whistle-blowers will not go public. When a Government seeks to prosecute or otherwise penalize a publicly disclosing whistle-blower, the burden should be on the State to show that the whistle-blower's perceptions of non-protection or non-redress were unreasonable.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 38
- Paragraph text
- Notwithstanding such balancing, the public may have an exceptionally strong right to know about some kinds of information or allegations, such that they override even potentially effective internal or oversight processes. For example, public disclosure of serious violations of international human rights law, international humanitarian law or other fundamental rights in a State's constitutional or statutory framework should be encouraged regardless of the effectiveness of internal mechanisms. The same may hold true where the value of the public's knowledge of the information depends upon its timely or urgent disclosure. The public has an overriding interest in knowing of allegations of serious violations of fundamental legal norms (see A/68/362).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- Maintaining the confidentiality of whistle-blowers may be especially difficult, depending on the nature, size and scope of the institution. Even so, whistle-blower laws should protect strongly against the risk that persons who disclose facts that indicate wrongdoing may be subject to personal attack and other forms of retaliation. Guarantees and mechanisms of confidentiality provide important protection against retaliation. States should not breach the confidentiality of the source by putting pressure on the media or any other organization or person to whom the whistle-blower disclosed the information. Whistle-blowing mechanisms should provide for secure submissions and take other steps to ensure the confidentiality of disclosures, including by defining intentional or negligent breaches of confidentiality as a form of retaliation subject to penalty.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 18
- Paragraph text
- Individuals and civil society are subjected to interference and attack by State and non-State actors, against which encryption and anonymity may provide protection. In article 17 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, States are obliged to protect privacy against unlawful and arbitrary interference and attacks. Under such an affirmative obligation, States should ensure the existence of domestic legislation that prohibits unlawful and arbitrary interference and attacks on privacy, whether committed by government or non-governmental actors. Such protection must include the right to a remedy for a violation. In order for the right to a remedy to be meaningful, individuals must be given notice of any compromise of their privacy through, for instance, weakened encryption or compelled disclosure of user data.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 41
- Paragraph text
- Without protection against retaliation and the possibility of redress, few would disclose wrongdoing. Protection should be detailed explicitly in law, providing whistle-blowers and others with clarity about the nature of the protection that they may seek. In particular, whistle-blowers must be protected against coercion or harassment of themselves or their families, discrimination, physical harm to a person or property, threats of retaliation, job loss, suspension or demotion, transfer or other hardship, disciplinary penalty, blacklisting or prosecution on grounds of breach of secrecy laws, libel or defamation. In the event of investigation or prosecution, whistle-blowers should be permitted to raise all of the principles identified above in their defence, especially that the disclosure was to protect a specified public interest that outweighed harm to a governmental interest. Whistle-blower laws should provide a mechanism to redress wrongdoing and prohibit those forms of retaliation, among others.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 54
- Paragraph text
- First, whistle-blower definitions should apply broadly to encourage all disclosures of wrongdoing that implicate the interests of the organization and all stakeholders, including Governments and civil society. As it stands, many organizations' protections apply to reports of staff failures to comply with obligations, rather than applying to the full range of wrongdoing of which a person may gain knowledge. A public interest standard for reporting would cover a wider scope of wrongdoing to which the United Nations and its staff become privy. Policies should also protect all whistle-blowers from retaliation, not just staff members but others who may be associated with the organization.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 23
- Paragraph text
- Freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas: In environments of prevalent censorship, individuals may be forced to rely on encryption and anonymity in order to circumvent restrictions and exercise the right to seek, receive and impart information. Some States have curtailed access with a variety of tools. State censorship, for instance, poses sometimes insurmountable barriers to the right to access information. Some States impose content-based, often discriminatory restrictions or criminalize online expression, intimidating political opposition and dissenters and applying defamation and lese-majesty laws to silence journalists, defenders and activists. A VPN connection, or use of Tor or a proxy server, combined with encryption, may be the only way in which an individual is able to access or share information in such environments.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 24
- Paragraph text
- It bears emphasizing that human rights law also protects the right to seek, receive and impart scientific information and ideas. The Universal Declaration and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights protect rights to education and "to share in scientific advancement and its benefits". Encryption and anonymity technologies enable individuals to share in such information in situations where they are otherwise denied, and they are themselves examples of scientific advancement. Their use empowers individuals to gain access to the benefits of scientific progress that might be curtailed by Government. The Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights noted that "the rights to science and to culture should both be understood as including a right to have access to and use information and communication and other technologies in self-determined and empowering ways" (see A/HRC/20/26, para. 19).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Education
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 34
- Paragraph text
- Punishment for defamation of government officials is widespread and directly interferes with freedom of expression, whether by imposing penalties on expression or dissuading individuals from criticizing officials or government policy. Journalists and writers are regular targets of defamation prosecutions or civil lawsuits. In Angola, for instance, the Government charged and convicted an author of criminal defamation upon publication of a book on conflict diamonds and corruption in the country. Honduran officials have reportedly intimidated journalists and human rights defenders on charges of defamation. In Tajikistan, while the Government has eliminated criminal penalties for defamation in most cases (but not for defamation of the President), government officials may still bring civil defamation lawsuits against journalists or publishers. Particularly with respect to public figures, national laws should be careful to ensure that any respondent in a defamation case may raise a public interest defence, and even untrue statements made in error and without malice should not be rendered unlawful or subject to penalty (see Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 34, para. 47). The joint declaration on freedom of expression of 2000 by the Special Rapporteur, the Representative on Freedom of the Media of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights cautioned against sanctioning defamation such that it chills the exercise of freedom of expression itself.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 7
- Paragraph text
- Encryption - a mathematical "process of converting messages, information, or data into a form unreadable by anyone except the intended recipient" - protects the confidentiality and integrity of content against third-party access or manipulation. Strong encryption, once the sole province of militaries and intelligence services, is now publicly accessible and often freely available to secure e-mail, voice communication, images, hard drives and website browsers. With "public key encryption", the dominant form of end-to-end security for data in transit, the sender uses the recipient's public key to encrypt the message and its attachments, and the recipient uses her or his own private key to decrypt them. Encryption may also be used to create digital signatures to ensure that a document and its sender are authentic, to authenticate and verify the identity of a server and to protect the integrity of communications between clients against tampering or manipulation of traffic by third parties (e.g., "man-in-the-middle" attacks). Since the encryption of data in transit does not ensure against attacks on unencrypted data when it is sitting at rest at either endpoint (nor protect the security of one's private key), one may also encrypt data at rest stored on laptops, hard drives, servers, tablets, mobile phones and other devices. Online practices may also be moving away from the system described here and towards "forward secrecy" or "off-the-record" technology in which keys are held ephemerally, particularly for uses such as instant messaging.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 48
- Paragraph text
- Women may also face particular restrictions targeting their expression. In 2013, the Human Rights Council affirmed the fundamental role that freedom of opinion and expression plays in the ability of women to interact with society at large, in particular in the realms of economic and political participation, and called upon States to promote, respect and ensure women's exercise of freedom of opinion and expression, both online and offline, including as members of NGOs and other associations (see Council resolution 23/2). Unfortunately, this commitment remains largely unfulfilled in many parts of the world. In 2014, in Saudi Arabia, two advocates for the rights of women were detained for driving. Earlier in 2016, I, along with other mandate holders, raised concerns about the systematic attacks and threats of sexual and physical violence made against three women human rights defenders and two women human rights lawyers in the State of Chhattisgarh, India.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Gender
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Women
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 27
- Paragraph text
- States often present justifications that identify limitations other than those permitted by article 19 (3) or required by article 20. Saudi Arabia has noted that its Basic Law of Governance "stipulates that all means of expression must employ civil and polite language". Article 19, however, does not permit restrictions merely on the basis of civility, a capacious and subjective term. In Burundi, a radio journalist was charged with "manquement à la solidarité publique", or a breach of public solidarity, also not rooted in the objectives of article 19 (3). Bangladesh adopted a national broadcast policy that in important respects promoted the independence of broadcast media, but at the same time included prohibitions of expression "against the State and public interest", "misinformation" and "distorted truth" that were not based on permissible objectives under article 19.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 55
- Paragraph text
- In the present report, I have sought to describe trends working against freedom of opinion and expression around the world today. Those trends are sobering. Individuals seeking to exercise their right to expression face all kinds of limitations. Rationales are often unsustainable. Some of the limitations involve assertions of a legitimate objective - typically national security or public order - without the barest demonstration of legality or necessity and proportionality. Other limitations are based on objectives that are not legitimate under international human rights law. Old tools remain in use, while others are expanding, as States exploit society's pervasive need to access the Internet. The targets of restrictions include journalists and bloggers, critics of government, dissenters from conventional life, provocateurs and minorities of all sorts. Our communications have revealed allegations relating to all of these issues, and reporting from civil society suggests that the problems are more pervasive and extensive than even our communications illuminate.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 80
- Paragraph text
- The outcome of the World Summit on the Information Society demonstrated the continuing broad support for multi-stakeholder governance of the Internet. The existing model nonetheless faces increasing pressure in the form of specific national policies (such as data localization) and strategies such as "cybersovereignty". Moreover, there is a persistent need to maintain or increase human rights participation at all levels of governance, including the setting of technical standards, and to ensure that Internet governance frameworks and reform efforts are sensitive to the needs of women, sexual minorities and other vulnerable communities.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Women
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 82
- Paragraph text
- The information and communication technology sector is always in rapid development, continually upgrading technology, digitizing everyday life. As a result, addressing legal and policy issues with an eye to current normative gaps involves some risk of failing to address trends that are only now emerging or have yet to emerge. This is a natural feature of the digital age, but even with rapid change in technology, the digital environment will continue to be animated by persistent threats to freedom of opinion and expression. These threats include government dominance of, or attempts to dominate, sources of information, using tools of censorship against online services and infrastructure; the struggle of businesses to promote their products and services in environments that are hostile to freedom of expression; the failures of many business enterprises to ensure the promotion and protection of rights in their pursuit of commercial interests; and the often contradictory demands of individuals that business entities provide them not only with security but also convenience, connectivity and community. As the project of exploring information and communication technology responsibilities moves forward, the Special Rapporteur will be looking to experts in the field -in Government, the private sector, civil society, the technical community, academia - to help him conduct analysis and reporting that respond both to the current issues at the intersection of technology and freedom of expression and to long-term features of the digital age.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 83
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur strongly encourages all stakeholders - whether State actors, private sector enterprises or civil society organizations and individuals - to take an active part in the development of the forthcoming projects. He particularly encourages stakeholders from less developed countries and vulnerable communities to share perspectives on the impact that the information and communication technology sector may have on the enjoyment of rights and the role that States may play in either interfering with or advancing those rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 45
- Paragraph text
- States also seek to restrict digital content outside the law. Some States have pushed for social media companies and other hosts of user-generated content to monitor and take down content on their own initiative, rather than wait for law-based requests from the Government. Government officials have also attempted to persuade companies to adopt "counter-speech" initiatives through public forums, campaigns and in private discussions. Governments are also increasingly flagging content on social media as inappropriate under a platform's terms of service, in order to prompt the company to remove the content or deactivate an account.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 70
- Paragraph text
- The scope of the corporation's responsibility to remediate is also contested. Who bears the burden of remediating improper removals or data requests when companies interpret or enforce relevant State laws too strictly? When a company's products or services are used to perpetrate human rights abuses, what degree of causation triggers the duty to provide a remedy? When companies face allegations of wrongdoing, is there a duty to conduct internal investigations, and must these investigations meet certain standards? Where a restriction implicates individuals across borders, what jurisdiction is appropriate for the consideration of remedies? These questions reflect the uncertainty that human rights victims face in situations where corporate and State conduct are intertwined.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 9
- Paragraph text
- Human rights law does not as a general matter directly govern the activities or responsibilities of private business. A variety of initiatives provide guidance to enterprises to ensure compliance with fundamental rights. The Human Rights Council endorsed the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations "Protect, Respect and Remedy" Framework (see A/HRC/17/4 and A/HRC/17/31). Reflecting existing human rights law, the Guiding Principles reaffirm that States must ensure that not only State organs but also businesses under their jurisdiction respect human rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 48
- Paragraph text
- Service shutdowns and associated restrictions are a particularly pernicious means of enforcing content regulations. Such measures are frequently justified on the basis of national security, the maintenance of public order or the prevention of public unrest. In 2015, the Special Rapporteur, together with representatives of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Organization of American States and the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights condemned as unlawful Internet "kill switches". In one year alone, there were reports of shutdowns in Bangladesh, Brazil, Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, India and Pakistan. The Special Rapporteur confirmed instances of telecommunication service provider and service shutdowns in Tajikistan, during his official visit in March 2016.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- In addition to refraining from unnecessary and disproportionate restrictions on digital access, States also have a duty to ensure a free and open Internet. Network neutrality is the principle that all Internet data, content and services be treated equally and without improper discrimination. However, Internet service providers may deploy technologies that speed up or otherwise favour access to certain content and services, while slowing down others (a practice also known as "throttling"). The growing number of collaborations between Internet service providers and content-hosting platforms that offer free wireless data to access online content or services provided by the latter (also known as the provision of "zero rated" services) has attracted controversy. While such measures detract from the principle of net neutrality, it remains a subject of debate whether they may be permissible in areas genuinely lacking Internet access.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 50
- Paragraph text
- State regulation in this area is patchy and uncertain. A few States have recognized the general importance of network neutrality. Romania, for example, has stated that it is "in favour of all initiatives to guarantee that online information can be accessed in a meaningful way by the entire population". Fewer States have provided specific legal protection. In early 2016, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India issued a regulation prohibiting service providers from offering or charging "discriminatory tariffs for data services being offered or charged to the consumer on the basis of content". Some form of network neutrality has been adopted in law or policy by countries including Brazil, Chile, the Netherlands and the United States.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 78
- Paragraph text
- Companies that transmit, store or generate communications and other forms of user data - particularly telecommunication and Internet service providers, and content-hosting platforms - face mounting demands from law enforcement and security services for access to their customers' information. Future work will seek to identify approaches that could maximize the scope for freedom of expression while nonetheless addressing legitimate governmental interests in national security and public order.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 30
- Paragraph text
- No restrictions may be imposed on the right to hold opinions without interference; restrictions under article 19 (3) of the Covenant only apply to expression under article 19 (2). In environments where one's opinions, however held online, result in surveillance or harassment, encryption and anonymity may provide necessary privacy. Restrictions on such security tools may interfere with the ability of individuals to hold opinions.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 90
- Paragraph text
- Beyond adoption of policies, private entities should also integrate commitments to freedom of expression into internal policymaking, product engineering, business development, staff training and other relevant internal processes. The Special Rapporteur will aim to explore policies and the full range of implementation steps in a number of ways, including through company visits.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 83a
- Paragraph text
- [Legal frameworks must ensure that communications surveillance measures:] Are prescribed by law, meeting a standard of clarity and precision that is sufficient to ensure that individuals have advance notice of and can foresee their application;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 33
- Paragraph text
- Regardless of the approach taken, the scope of protected disclosures should be easily understandable by potential whistle-blowers. Legalistic definitions may lead potential whistle-blowers not to report because of a lack of clarity about what is covered by a protection framework.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 46
- Paragraph text
- Where internal or external oversight mechanisms have not operated or do not operate so as to provide protection and effective redress in the face of a disclosure, the following principles apply generally in the context of external, public disclosure.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 83c
- Paragraph text
- [Legal frameworks must ensure that communications surveillance measures:] Adhere to the principle of proportionality, and are not employed when less invasive techniques are available or have not yet been exhausted.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 84
- Paragraph text
- States should criminalize illegal surveillance by public or private actors. Such laws must not be used to target whistleblowers or other individuals seeking to expose human rights violations, nor should they hamper the legitimate oversight of government action by citizens.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 80
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur is deeply concerned that websites of human rights organizations, critical bloggers, and other individuals or organizations that disseminate information that is embarrassing to the State or the powerful have increasingly become targets of cyber-attacks.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 20
- Paragraph text
- Web-hosting services enable users to upload and deliver files and other materials to their readers' or customers' browsers. These companies typically also provide data storage, e-mail and other services associated with the websites their customers have purchased.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 22
- Paragraph text
- Companies that create or purchase content produced on their platforms often hold the copyright to such content, enabling them to monetize and manage access to it. Some of the most influential copyright holders are media and entertainment companies, including news media, publishing houses, music labels, and film and television studios.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 34
- Paragraph text
- The information and communications technology sector's multiple roles raise legal and policy questions that deserve attention and elaboration by international human rights mechanisms.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom of expression 2014, para. 85
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur recommends that States take the actions set out below.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and media freedom 2012, para. 103
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur also calls on all States to publicly condemn all forms and incidents of attacks against journalists at the highest political level.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 99
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur also encourages donors to support training courses, projects, policies and programmes to enhance the protection of journalists and citizen journalists.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Hate speech and incitement to hatred 2012, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- [Hate speech on the basis of racial or ethnic origin is further prohibited under article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which stipulates that States parties:]
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 38
- Paragraph text
- Since content delivery networks process large volumes of user requests for Internet content from multiple websites and platforms, they are also vulnerable to government surveillance. In 2016, for example, Amazon Web Services, which houses one of the world’s biggest content delivery networks, reported that government requests to access data more than doubled from the previous year. Researchers also believe that mass surveillance activities strategically target content delivery networks to maximize information collection, but specifically how this is conducted and the extent of content delivery network involvement, if any, is unclear.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 29
- Paragraph text
- While the duty of States to respect and protect freedom of expression is well-established, the private actors that establish, operate and maintain digital access also play a critical role.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 30
- Paragraph text
- Telecommunications providers (Telcos) and ISPs (collectively referred to in the present report as “providers”) offer a diverse range of services. While they principally operate and sell access to the series of networks that comprise the Internet, they also enable users to communicate and share information through mobile services and traditional landlines (see A/HRC/32/38, para. 16). While providers remain State-owned in many regions, a growing number are now privately established and managed. The industry is also increasingly multinational: some of the world’s biggest providers operate networks in multiple countries and regions, often through partnerships with domestic companies or their own subsidiaries.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 83
- Paragraph text
- This is not to say that private companies do not face pressures. They do. But when States request corporate involvement in censorship or surveillance, companies should seek to prevent or mitigate the adverse human rights impacts of their involvement to the maximum extent allowed by law. In any event, companies should take all necessary and lawful measures to ensure that they do not cause, contribute or become complicit in human rights abuses. Arrangements with corporate partners should be structured to ensure that all parties uphold their human rights responsibilities. Companies should also seek to build leverage in pre-existing business relationships to prevent or mitigate adverse human rights impacts.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 59
- Paragraph text
- As with every major technology development, design and engineering choices reflect public policy considerations, and should be guided by respect for human rights. For example, network slicing, a key 5G technology, could enable mobile providers to manage network traffic more efficiently and cater to the ever-expanding range of consumer needs in the Internet of Things (IoT) era. At the same time, networks could also be “sliced” into fast and slow lanes that prioritize access to some Internet applications over others, potentially interfering with net neutrality. Accordingly, companies should ensure that innovations in network equipment and technology — particularly those with multiple uses — are designed and deployed so as to be consistent with freedom of expression and privacy standards.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 16
- Paragraph text
- Human rights law also recognizes connections between the right to freedom of expression as contained in article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other rights. The right to information is also closely connected to article 25 (1) of the International Covenant, which protects every citizen’s right and opportunity to “take part in the conduct of public affairs”. The Human Rights Committee has emphasized the importance of freedom of information to public participation “without censorship” (CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.7, para. 25). The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) reiterated and expanded on this point (and others) in its 2015 report on the promotion, protection and implementation of the right to participate in public affairs in the context of the existing human rights law (A/HRC/30/26).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 55
- Paragraph text
- Over the past 70 years, the United Nations and other intergovernmental organizations have served foundational roles in expanding the rule of law globally. While not always successful, these organizations enable the coordination of policy and the development of legal norms in the fields of security, development, governance and many others, and they are consistently perceived as important institutions by public opinion around the world. Strengthening them, ensuring that they serve the functions for which they were created, enhancing public participation in their work, these are the underlying goals of the present report. Development of access-to-information policies, in keeping with the global legal trends for freedom of information, will advance the objectives of intergovernmental organizations and the Member States that constitute them.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 57
- Paragraph text
- Intergovernmental organizations should make efforts now to create openness and to establish policies and infrastructure that not only provide information of all kinds but also promote such requests. Intergovernmental organizations should welcome the opportunities to provide transparency because, although transparency can cause embarrassment and, occasionally, give rise to scandal, it also sends a broader message of understanding that public knowledge is critical, especially so since these institutions serve critical public functions. Opacity, by contrast, sends the opposite message: we are distant; our work does not concern you; your support is unnecessary.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 43
- Paragraph text
- UNDP provides a useful model. Upon a non-disclosure response from its Legal Office, a person making a request may ask for a review of the determination by the Information Disclosure Oversight Panel. According to paragraph 21 of the UNDP information disclosure policy, the Panel consists of four members, all appointed by the UNDP Administrator with input from the Bureaux, including one from the UNDP Office of Audit and Investigations; one from the UNDP Ethics Office; one from a United Nations agency other than UNDP; and one from a non-governmental organization. The Panel reviews the denial of requests to disclose a document or portion of a document to a member of the public, and provides a final recommendation within 30 calendar days of receipt of the appeal. The Panel shares its recommendation with the UNDP Administrator and the relevant internal unit or office. The Administrator has the authority to make the final decision, taking into consideration the recommendations of the Panel. If the Administrator determines that the requested information will not be disclosed, the reasoning is provided.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 79g (ii)
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur proposes the following principles for determining the conditions that must be satisfied in order for a limitation or restriction on freedom of expression to be permissible:] Any restrictions imposed on the exercise of a right must be "necessary", which means that the limitation or restriction must: Address a pressing public or social need which must be met in order to prevent the violation of a legal right that is protected to an even greater extent;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 79l
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur proposes the following principles for determining the conditions that must be satisfied in order for a limitation or restriction on freedom of expression to be permissible:] All restrictions and limitations shall be interpreted in the light and context of the particular right concerned. Wherever doubt exists as to the interpretation or scope of a law imposing limitations or restrictions, the protection of fundamental human rights shall be the prevailing consideration.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 81ii
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur also wishes to stress that, as provided in paragraph 5 (p) of Human Rights Council resolution 12/16, restrictions on the following aspects of the right to freedom of expression are not permissible:] The free flow of information and ideas, including practices such as the banning or closing of publications or other media and the abuse of administrative measures and censorship;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 70l
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur would like to highlight the joint work undertaken with the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) through a series of regional consultations held for the purpose of identifying and endorsing the principles that should underlie a democratic regulatory framework for community radio and television. Information on these principles is included in the annex. These principles are:] Financing;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 70m
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur would like to highlight the joint work undertaken with the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) through a series of regional consultations held for the purpose of identifying and endorsing the principles that should underlie a democratic regulatory framework for community radio and television. Information on these principles is included in the annex. These principles are:] Public funding;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph