Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 1333 entities
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
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 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
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 61c
- Paragraph text
- [The political bodies of the United Nations, especially the General Assembly and Human Rights Council, and other intergovernmental organizations should:] Provide comprehensive information concerning organizational governance mechanisms, including election and selection or appointment processes, and broader and simpler accreditation of organizations to participate in and monitor organizational 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)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 61d
- Paragraph text
- [The political bodies of the United Nations, especially the General Assembly and Human Rights Council, and other intergovernmental organizations should:] Promote knowledge of access to information policies, including through the provision of clear information on websites and active dissemination and promotion of those policies to staff and stakeholders.
- 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. 60a
- Paragraph text
- [International organizations, especially the United Nations, should:] Begin the process of adopting rigorous access-to-information policies. At a minimum, organizations should identify and appoint access-to-information focal points to coordinate the adoption process. I specifically encourage the Secretary-General to appoint the director of the Department of Public Information to lead such an effort on an urgent 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
- 2017
Paragraph