Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 142 entities
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. 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. 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
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
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 47
- Paragraph text
- The digital access industry is in the business of digital expression; its commercial viability depends on users who seek, receive and impart information and ideas on the networks it builds and operates. Since privately owned networks are indispensable to the contemporary exercise of freedom of expression, their operators also assume critical social and public functions. The industry’s decisions, whether in response to government demands or rooted in commercial interests, can directly impact freedom of expression and related human rights in both beneficial and detrimental ways.
- 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
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 61
- Paragraph text
- Human rights engagement with governments, corporate partners and other stakeholders may prevent or mitigate human rights violations down the line. Companies that deal directly with governments should push for human rights safeguards in operating licences and sales contracts, such as assurances that network equipment will not be accessed or modified without the company’s knowledge (which can be for the purpose of facilitating human rights abuses). Timely intervention during litigation (such as amicus filings in cases brought by civil society groups or peer companies against censorship or surveillance laws) and human rights-oriented lobbying in legislative and policymaking processes may also advance legal protections for freedom of 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)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
The role of digital access providers 2017, para. 72
- Paragraph text
- Companies should disclose their policies and actions that implicate freedom of expression. Relevant disclosures include data retention and use policies, network management practices and the sale and purchase of network filtering and interception technologies. Companies should also disclose information about the frequency, scope and subject matter of due diligence processes and a summary of high-level findings. In general, companies should consult the growing number of resources that study valuable transparency indicators and other transparency best practices. Users, civil society and peer companies should also be consulted on the design and implementation of transparency 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
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 17
- Paragraph text
- Recognition of the right to information, consistent with article 19 of the International Covenant, has come with the acknowledgment that access to information may be subject to limitations. Those limitations, originating in article 19 (3), must be provided by law and be necessary and proportionate in order to protect the rights or reputations of others, national security or public order or public health or morals. I have previously reviewed how the restrictions permissible under article 19 (3) apply in the context of freedom of information (A/70/361, paras. 8-13). How international organizations might translate the norms of the International Covenant for the purposes of their own access-to-information initiatives is discussed 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
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- The policies of intergovernmental organizations must clarify what kinds of information may not be disclosed; in their actual withholding of information, they should be held to a high standard in identifying their reasons. At a minimum, intergovernmental organizations should specify what kinds of information they consider to be sensitive and subject to non-disclosure. In doing so, they should not overstate what is subject to non-disclosure but adhere strictly to notions of public interest.
- 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. 71
- Paragraph text
- Even if local law limits full transparency, companies should nonetheless disclose all relevant and publishable information. For example, if companies are prohibited from disclosing the origin or basis of a shutdown request, they should nevertheless seek to provide regular updates about the services affected or restored, the steps they are taking to address the issue and explanations after the fact. Innovative transparency measures, such as the publication of aggregate data and the selective withholding of information, also mitigate the impact of gag orders and other non-disclosure laws. Companies should disclose all the local laws with which they comply and, where possible, challenge any law or regulation that prevents or hinders them from being transparent to users and the general 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
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 35
- Paragraph text
- Second, information about the selection and election process for all categories of committees and monitoring bodies, whether involving Member States, experts or others, should be subject to disclosure. Generally, intergovernmental organizations should be making greater efforts to disclose specific kinds of governance decision-making. For instance, one of the most basic public functions of organizations, elections, whether of State delegations to serve on committees or individuals to serve in expert roles such as special rapporteurs, remain largely closed to public scrutiny. Organizations should devote clearly identifiable space on their websites for information about candidates to elective or selective positions, and they should provide information about State compliance with the organization’s norms in the context of elections to bodies held by State delegations. Those making appointments or selections to expert bodies should make public the reasons for their choices. Timely and interactive access to such processes would enhance their credibility as well as the accountability of those making the selections. As noted below, some kinds of information may be subject to non-disclosure, for instance, if necessary to protect the personal data of individual candidates for positions. Generally, however, there is legitimate dissatisfaction among civil society organizations about their limited ability to learn about such processes as they are happening. In turn, the lack of information leads to misunderstandings about the nature of elective or appointment 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
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 50
- Paragraph text
- First, and perhaps most seriously, the new policy does not provide for sanctions against those who retaliate against whistle-blowers. Notably, the policy provides consequences that could favour the person claiming retaliation, such as rescission of the decision, reinstatement, or transfer (ST/SGB/2017/2, para. 8.5). Nonetheless, it does not provide for the imposition of any penalty on the staff or leadership responsible for the retaliatory action. Until the policy provides for such penalties, the protective framework will be weak.
- 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. 7
- Paragraph text
- The government actions described below often fail to meet the standards of human rights law. Moreover, a lack of transparency pervades government interferences with the digital access industry. Failures of transparency include vague laws providing excessive discretion to authorities, legal restrictions on third party disclosures concerning government access to user data and specific gag orders. The lack of transparency undermines the rule of law as well as public understanding across this sector.
- 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
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 11
- Paragraph text
- From the early days of the mandate’s work, Special Rapporteurs have elaborated on the right to information. In only the second report of the mandate, the Special Rapporteur highlighted the “vitally important” roles served by the right to information (E/CN.4/1995/32, para. 135), and the 1998 report emphasized that “the right to access to information held by the Government must be the rule rather than the exception”. The 1998 report also noted a specific right to information about “State security” and, in a notable statement, raised concerns about government prosecution of civil servants who disclose “information which has been classified”, adding that Governments “continue to classify far more information than could be considered necessary”. By this the Special Rapporteur meant that Governments should only withhold material in which “serious harm to the State’s interest is unavoidable if the information is made public and that this harm outweighs the harm to the rights of opinion, expression and information”. He concluded, “The tendency to classify or withhold information on the basis of, for example, ‘Cabinet confidentiality’ is too often the practice, which adversely affects access to information” (E/CN.4/1998/40, paras. 12 and 13).
- 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. 80
- Paragraph text
- The protective role that States may exercise over the private sector can only go so far. They should not be promoting the economic gain of private entities over users’ rights to freedom of opinion and expression. Thus, States should prohibit attempts to assign priority to certain types of Internet content or applications over others for payment or other commercial benefits.
- 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. 46
- Paragraph text
- Some Governments ensure oversight through annual reports that review the status of their freedom of information regime. The World Bank has followed suit by publishing annual freedom of information reports. In the spirit of such disclosure, intergovernmental organizations should consider posting the responses to requests on their websites so that all subsequent requesters have access to that information. Annual reports that provide statistics regarding the implementation of their access-to-information policies, and their consistency with article 19 of the International Covenant, ensure the proper review of existing policies. For example, IFC monitors its own policy and issues periodic reports on its implementation. This helps show the tangible effects its policy has on increasing transparency and access to information. It also discloses monthly summaries of requests for the public to view and monitor and discloses how many appeals were filed before the Appeals Board.
- 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. 47
- Paragraph text
- Access-to-information policies should be subject to regular review and take into account the changes in the nature of information held, including a formal requirement that they be subject to comprehensive review on a regular basis. This allows an opportunity to assess how well the implementation process is and whether there is room for improvement. Moreover, it provides an opportunity to amend the policy to provide for greater information disclosure and to align it with international best practices. These reviews should be conducted in a fully transparent manner and include multi-stakeholder consultation to get feedback from a broad range of stakeholders. Particular attention should be paid to whether categories of information need to be changed. Intergovernmental organizations need to reflect the changing demands of the public and should operate on policies that best suit these demands.
- 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. 48
- Paragraph text
- Two years ago, in my annual report to the General Assembly (A/70/361), I provided an assessment of how international human rights law protects sources of information and whistle-blowers. That report sought to clarify the norms promoting and protecting whistle-blowing, specifically because of the access to information that such rules seek to guarantee, particularly information in the public interest such as, inter alia, waste, fraud, abuse, illegality, human rights violations, war crimes or crimes against humanity. The points highlighted in that report apply in the context of this report as well. Indeed, the 2015 report emphasized the importance of whistle-blower protections in intergovernmental organizations and encouraged the development of policies that would define whistle-blowing broadly to cover all sorts of otherwise unauthorized disclosures, the reinforcement of the independence and effectiveness of whistle-blowing mechanisms, the adoption of strong transparency and access-to-information processes and protection 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)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 27
- Paragraph text
- One of the earliest access-to-information policies was established by UNDP, which operates on a presumption in favour of disclosure. It defines what type of information it discloses and where the policy applies. A notable feature of this policy is that it provides a link to publicly available information to help requesters determine what type of information they might need to request. Like many intergovernmental organizations, UNDP has a list of exceptions to disclosure. Like UNEP, it has a harm test and a public interest override, under which an independent Information Disclosure Oversight Panel determines whether certain types of information should be disclosed because such disclosure would serve a public benefit. UNDP has specific request times: 30 calendar days for information requests; and 30 calendar days for appeals. It includes not only an annex of information that describes exceptions and the information normally made available to the public but it also a flowchart as a visual aid to describe the information-request process.
- 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. 31
- Paragraph text
- Requests for information should be a necessary fall-back position in any access-to-information policy. At the foundation of such a policy, organizations must actively disclose information that is likely to be of relevance to the public, and they should do so on a timely basis, including consistent and usable updates, especially of websites. In this regard, OHCHR has made significant strides in the digital age, providing access to outcome documents from both charter-based (for example, the Human Rights Council and its special procedures mechanisms) and treaty-based mechanisms, webcasting of meetings of those mechanisms, regular press briefings by the spokesperson of the United Nations High Commissioner, annual reports and periodic reporting to the Council on all special procedures communications. While there are still important areas for improvement, the OHCHR public disclosures policy mirrors what other institutions are doing across the United Nations system and at other 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)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 63a
- Paragraph text
- [Civil society organizations, the media and members of the public should:] Engage directly and seek a formal role with intergovernmental organizations in the process of development of access to information policies, including by identifying for them the key areas of interest in 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
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 63b
- Paragraph text
- [Civil society organizations, the media and members of the public should:] Make requests for information from intergovernmental organizations as soon as possible, even before the development of access policies, in order to determine the way in which they currently handle such formal requests;
- 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. 63c
- Paragraph text
- [Civil society organizations, the media and members of the public should:] Share information with other organizations and with the Special Rapporteur about the experience of engaging with intergovernmental organizations in the development of access 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
- 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. 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
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. 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
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