Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 149 entities
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. 12
- Paragraph text
- The failure to explain or acknowledge shutdowns creates the perception that they are designed to suppress reporting, criticism or dissent. Reports of repression and State-sanctioned violence in the wake of network disruptions have led to allegations that some States exploit the darkness to commit and cover up abuses. In Sudan, for example, Internet access was shut down for several hours during a deadly crackdown on demonstrators protesting fuel price hikes in September 2013.
- 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
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 22
- Paragraph text
- Direct access to Internet and telecommunications networks enables authorities to intercept and monitor communications with limited legal scrutiny or accountability. Technological advances have enhanced the ability of law enforcement and intelligence agencies to obtain a direct connection to networks without the involvement or knowledge of the network operator. During the 2014 general election in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, intelligence authorities allegedly obtained direct access to the country’s major telecommunications networks to intercept the communications of over 20,000 people, including politicians, activists, government officials and journalists. Many targets were also sent a transcript of their phone calls. In India, it appears that authorities are developing a Central Monitoring System programme that would enable “electronic provisioning of target numbers by government agency without any manual intervention from telecommunications service providers on a secure network.” These activities do not appear to be provided by law, lacking both judicial authorization and external oversight. Furthermore, the risks they pose to the security and integrity of network infrastructure raise proportionality concerns.
- 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
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
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. 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
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
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. 21
- Paragraph text
- Governments have also disrupted Internet and telecommunications services in the name of national security and public order. Such disruptions include the shutdown of entire networks, the blocking of websites and platforms and the suspension of telecommunications and mobile services. In advance of elections, both Turkey and Uganda are alleged to have restricted access online. Malaysia invoked its Sedition Act to justify blocking a news site, while Nauru cited crime prevention as one of the reasons for blocking a number of social media websites in 2015. I confirmed during my mission to Tajikistan in 2016 that the Government has repeatedly blocked access to messaging services in times of public protest and has maintained a long-time block on social media websites operated from outside the country. The Democratic Republic of the Congo, Burundi, India, Bangladesh, Brazil and Pakistan were reported to have blocked Internet and text messaging services in 2015.
- 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. 32
- Paragraph text
- Political and human rights activists have been especially targeted by such rules against criticism, often under the pretext of protecting public order. For instance, human rights activists have been harassed repeatedly in Bahrain; one activist was prosecuted for tearing up a picture of the King. The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela has prosecuted and detained in solitary confinement an opposition political leader. Students in Thailand were detained by members of the military for advocating in support of the Prime Minister ousted in a coup.
- 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. 38
- Paragraph text
- In the context of protests, it is common for journalists to be detained and prohibited from reporting. Such has been the case in Egypt, where journalists collecting information about demonstrations have been detained and charged on various grounds, including involvement in terrorism. At least seven journalists and media workers in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela were arrested and their equipment confiscated for covering looting and public protests. It may also be the case that local officials carry out their functions without appropriately taking into account the roles journalists play, in particular during protests. For instance, a journalist in Mexico covering protests was allegedly detained and severely mistreated by the local authorities. In the United States, journalists covering the protests in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014 were subjected to detention by the local 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)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- Non-State actors are especially responsible for attacks on individuals for expression of belief. Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), its affiliates and some of its supporters have committed atrocity after atrocity around the world on the basis of religious or ethnic affiliation or individual expression of belief. The attacks on Charlie Hebdo in Paris, for instance, were directed specifically against satirists who criticized all forms of dogma, religious or otherwise, although the killers in this instance were allegedly incensed over depictions of the Prophet Mohammed. Beyond ISIL, the series of murders of bloggers in Bangladesh reflects an effort to silence views that reject religious belief altogether. Such assaults are grave attacks on opinion, expression and belief, designed to silence - in a very direct way - not only the specific targets but also anyone who dares express an alternative viewpoint.
- 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
- Activists
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 31
- Paragraph text
- Several States penalize sedition or treason in their laws, targeting critics. Malaysia, for instance, has continued to defend its ongoing prosecution of individuals on the basis of a law that criminalizes seditious words or tendencies, arguing that the law promotes "national harmony". In practice, however, dozens of individuals have been detained or subject to prosecution under the Sedition Act merely for expression critical of the Government. Swaziland detained activists on sedition charges following criticism of the monarchical system of government. India has pursued charges against individuals, including a folk singer accused of writing lyrics critical of local government, on the grounds of section 124 A of its Penal Code, which prohibits expression that may cause "hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection" towards the Government. The Gambia has prosecuted a journalist on the grounds of "sedition" and the "publication of false news with intent to cause fear and alarm to the public" under Gambian law. Jordan has detained and prosecuted an academic for allegedly posting anti-Government comments on his Facebook page on the grounds of "undermining the political regime in the 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
- Activists
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- Perhaps most concerning is that Governments often fail to provide measures of protection and accountability that can deter attacks on journalists. The Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights presented alarming statistics involving killings, kidnappings and other forms of aggression against journalists in the Americas, with extremely limited accountability despite some efforts to create special mechanisms for the protection of journalists. Messages from the most senior leadership matter, as I have pointed out in the wake of threatening comments made by the leaders of Thailand and the Philippines. The widespread failure to hold perpetrators accountable for attacks on journalists suggests the absence of concern for the role that journalists play in democratic societies. My communications have highlighted reports and allegations of the failure of accountability in, among other places, South Sudan, where journalists have been killed and disappeared; Mexico, where journalists have been murdered and accountability is inconsistent; the Philippines, which after nearly seven years has not concluded its investigations and prosecutions against those responsible for the massacre of journalists in Maguindinao; and the Russian Federation, where there are multiple reports of journalists who have been murdered and the perpetrators not held to 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
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- Government repression of artists of all sorts persists. For instance, the mandate holder has sent communications to the Islamic Republic of Iran pertaining to the detention of a graphic artist who made a drawing in protest against the banning of family planning, the detention and flogging sentence of human rights defenders for collections of poetry, the detention of two musicians and a film-maker for "propaganda against the State" and "insulting the sacred" through the production of underground music, and the detention of individuals for appearing in a video protesting a State ban on women watching sports in stadiums. The Egyptian Penal Code provides a basis for restricting artists in its article 98, which subjects to penalties "whoever exploits and uses the religion in advocating and propagating orally, in writing or by any other method, extremist thoughts with the aim of instigating sedition or division, or disdaining and contempting any of the heavenly religions or prejudicing national unity and social peace". Qatar detained a poet for criticizing the Amir of Qatar and praising the Tunisian revolution in poems. Saudi Arabia imposed the death sentence, later commuted, on a poet for apostasy. In Cuba, an artist was detained on the basis of a charge of intending to release two pigs named after Raul and Fidel Castro during an artistic demonstration.
- 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
- Women
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 22
- Paragraph text
- In 2016, the Human Rights Council condemned unequivocally measures to intentionally prevent or disrupt access to or dissemination of information online in violation of international human rights law and called upon all States to refrain from and cease such measures (see Council resolution 32/13, para. 10). The blocking of Internet platforms and the shutting down of telecommunications infrastructure are persistent threats, for even if they are premised on national security or public order, they tend to block the communications of often millions of individuals (A/HRC/32/38, paras. 45-48). In a joint declaration in 2015, United Nations and regional experts in the field of freedom of expression condemned Internet shutdowns (or "kill switches") as unlawful. Similarly, the detention of bloggers and online journalists and other forms of attack on digital expression often rest on assertions of national security without demonstration of the necessity of such restrictions.
- 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
- 2016
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 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
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
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 protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 24
- Paragraph text
- Journalists are often subjected to searches of their persons, homes or offices, including their papers, hard drives and other digital devices. In addition to the normal rules that apply to such searches, a higher burden should be imposed in the context of journalists and others gathering and disseminating information. The United States Privacy Protection Act of 1980, for example, protects journalists and others from searches and seizures of their work product, while the Police and Criminal Evidence Act of 1984 of the United Kingdom excludes journalistic material from the scope of seizure authorities. The Code of Criminal Procedure of France enables searches of the offices of media only where "such investigations do not violate the freedom of exercise of the profession of journalist and do not unjustifiably obstruct or delay the distribution of 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
- 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. 48
- Paragraph text
- Many States recognize the lawfulness of maintaining the anonymity of journalists' sources. The Mexican Supreme Court and Mexican Code of Criminal Procedures recognize the right of journalists to maintain the anonymity of their sources; yet pressures on journalists are in fact severe. The Constitutions of Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador and Paraguay explicitly protect sources; Chile, El Salvador, Panama, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) protect sources in law. The Mozambique Constitution protects sources, while Angola purports to do so by statute. Australia, Canada, Japan and New Zealand have established case-specific judicial balancing tests to analyse source protection, although pressure on journalists may undermine such protections over time. States often breach source anonymity in practice, even where it is provided for in 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
- 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. 49
- Paragraph text
- Prohibition of anonymity online interferes with the right to freedom of expression. Many States ban it regardless of any specific government interest. The Constitution of Brazil (art. 5) prohibits anonymous speech. The Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (art. 57) similarly prohibits anonymity. In 2013, Viet Nam outlawed the use of pseudonyms, which forced individuals with personal blogs to publicly list their real name and address. In 2012, the Islamic Republic of Iran required the registration of all IP addresses in use inside the country and cybercafe users to register their real names before using a computer. Ecuadoran law requires commenters on websites and mobile phone owners to register under a real name.
- 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. 59
- Paragraph text
- States should promote strong encryption and anonymity. National laws should recognize that individuals are free to protect the privacy of their digital communications by using encryption technology and tools that allow anonymity online. Legislation and regulations protecting human rights defenders and journalists should also include provisions enabling access and providing support to use the technologies to secure their 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)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Activists
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The protection of sources and whistle-blowers 2015, para. 61
- Paragraph text
- National legal frameworks must protect the confidentiality of sources of journalists and of others who may engage in the dissemination of information of public interest. Laws guaranteeing confidentiality must reach beyond professional journalists, including those who may be performing a vital role in providing wide access to information of public interest such as bloggers, "citizen journalists", members of non-governmental organizations, authors and academics, all of whom may conduct research and disclose information in the public interest. Protection should be based on function, not on a formal title.
- 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. 12
- Paragraph text
- Encryption and anonymity, separately or together, create a zone of privacy to protect opinion and belief. For instance, they enable private communications and can shield an opinion from outside scrutiny, particularly important in hostile political, social, religious and legal environments. Where States impose unlawful censorship through filtering and other technologies, the use of encryption and anonymity may empower individuals to circumvent barriers and access information and ideas without the intrusion of authorities. Journalists, researchers, lawyers and civil society rely on encryption and anonymity to shield themselves (and their sources, clients and partners) from surveillance and harassment. The ability to search the web, develop ideas and communicate securely may be the only way in which many can explore basic aspects of identity, such as one's gender, religion, ethnicity, national origin or sexuality. Artists rely on encryption and anonymity to safeguard and protect their right to expression, especially in situations where it is not only the State creating limitations but also society that does not tolerate unconventional opinions or 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
- Activists
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph