Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 185 entities
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 24a
- Paragraph text
- [As set out in article 19, paragraph 3, of the Covenant, there are certain exceptional types of expression which may be legitimately restricted under international human rights law, essentially to safeguard the rights of others. This issue has been examined in the previous annual report of the Special Rapporteur. However, the Special Rapporteur deems it appropriate to reiterate that any limitation to the right to freedom of expression must pass the following three-part, cumulative test:] It must be provided by law, which is clear and accessible to everyone (principles of predictability and transparency); and
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 64
- Paragraph text
- At the national level, the Special Rapporteur notes that a number of initiatives have also been taken by States to address the digital divide. In India, Common Service Centres, or public "e-Kiosks", have been established by the Government in collaboration with the private sector as part of the National E-Governance Plan of 2006. As of January 2011, over 87,000 centres have reportedly been established, although the Special Rapporteur notes that the majority of the country's population still remains without Internet access. In Brazil, the Government has launched a "computers for all" programme which offers subsidies for purchasing computers. Additionally, over 100,000 publicly sponsored Internet access centres, known as "Local Area Network (LAN) Houses" with fast broadband Internet connections, have been established. Such public access points are particularly important to facilitate access for the poorest socio-economic groups, as they often do not have their own personal computers at home.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft 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)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 77
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur commends the work undertaken by organizations and individuals to reveal the worldwide status of online impediments to the right to freedom of expression. He encourages intermediaries in particular to disclose details regarding content removal requests and accessibility of websites. Additionally, he recommends corporations to establish clear and unambiguous terms of service in line with international human rights norms and principles and to continuously review the impact of their services and technologies on the right to freedom of expression of their users, as well as on the potential pitfalls involved when they are misused. The Special Rapporteur believes that such transparency will help promote greater accountability and respect for human rights.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 45
- Paragraph text
- While States are the duty-bearers for human rights, private actors and business enterprises also have a responsibility to respect human rights. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur highlights the framework of "Protect, Respect and Remedy" which has been developed by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises. The framework rests on three pillars: (a) the duty of the State to protect against human rights abuses by third parties, including business enterprises, through appropriate policies, regulation and adjudication; (b) the corporate responsibility to respect human rights, which means that business enterprises should act with due diligence to avoid infringing the rights of others and to address adverse impacts with which they are involved; and (c) the need for greater access by victims to effective remedy, both judicial and non-judicial.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft 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)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 73
- Paragraph text
- Concerns about the possible manipulation of opinion polls to influence electoral processes lead some States to restrict the dissemination of poll results for short periods leading up to an election; in general the period ranges from 24 to 36 hours. This restriction is sometimes justified by the limited capacity for verification of the methodology used by the polling agency before the election takes place. In order to ensure transparency and avoid the misuse of opinion polls, some countries have adopted requirements on the public disclosure of the methodology implemented in opinion polling exercises.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 63
- Paragraph text
- The use of encryption and anonymity tools and better digital literacy should be encouraged. The Special Rapporteur, recognizing that the value of encryption and anonymity tools depends on their widespread adoption, encourages States, civil society organizations and corporations to engage in a campaign to bring encryption by design and default to users around the world and, where necessary, to ensure that users at risk be provided the tools to exercise their right to freedom of opinion and expression securely.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
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.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- 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);
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- 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;
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 66
- Paragraph text
- Ongoing debate about the minimum standards for corporate disclosures and relevant best practices reflects uncertainty about the appropriate balance between transparency and competing values, such as individual security and trade secrecy. While there is growing consensus that corporations should disclose information about how restrictions are interpreted and enforced, there is less agreement about how this should be done. Similarly, there is widespread agreement about the importance of quantitative transparency, but it is less clear how such information should be contextualized, presented and made accessible.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft 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)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 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.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
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.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 79d
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur proposes the following principles for determining the conditions that must be satisfied in order for a limitation or restriction on freedom of expression to be permissible:] Laws imposing restrictions or limitations must be accessible, concrete, clear and unambiguous, such that they can be understood by everyone and applied to everyone. They must also be compatible with international human rights law, with the burden of proving this congruence lying with the State;
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 70h
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur would like to highlight the joint work undertaken with the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) through a series of regional consultations held for the purpose of identifying and endorsing the principles that should underlie a democratic regulatory framework for community radio and television. Information on these principles is included in the annex. These principles are:] Competent authorities;
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 70j
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur would like to highlight the joint work undertaken with the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) through a series of regional consultations held for the purpose of identifying and endorsing the principles that should underlie a democratic regulatory framework for community radio and television. Information on these principles is included in the annex. These principles are:] Non-discriminatory conditions;
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 70k
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur would like to highlight the joint work undertaken with the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) through a series of regional consultations held for the purpose of identifying and endorsing the principles that should underlie a democratic regulatory framework for community radio and television. Information on these principles is included in the annex. These principles are:] Evaluation criteria;
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Contemporary challenges to freedom of expression 2016, para. 53
- Paragraph text
- Some Governments have adopted strong policies and regulations to promote freedom of expression. In 2016, Norway launched an effort to place freedom of expression at the centre of its human rights policy. In 2015, the United States Federal Communications Commission adopted a policy of network neutrality following the adoption of similar policies by Governments, such as those of the Netherlands, Chile and Brazil. Several States have made an effort to expand infrastructure to improve Internet access. In Myanmar, the Government has taken significant steps to develop its Internet infrastructure: in June 2013, for example, it awarded operating licences to two foreign telecommunications companies as part of a broader push to deregulate the telecommunications industry. The United Republic of Tanzania, Rwanda and Mauritius were early adopters of digital broadcasting, thus providing "more opportunities to increase Internet access by freeing up unused spectrum". Of critical importance are the international statements of support for multi-stakeholder governance of the Internet that privileges security and openness and recognizes the value the Internet offers for freedom of expression. Several Governments have coordinated their efforts to expand Internet freedom through the Freedom Online Coalition and promote access to information through the Open Government Partnership. Several countries have adopted strong laws on the right to information and whistle-blower protection (see A/70/361).
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
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.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 32
- Paragraph text
- Governments should take the necessary legislative and administrative measures to improve access to public information for everyone. There are specific legislative and procedural characteristics that any access-to-information policy must have, including: observance of the principle of maximum disclosure; the presumption of the public nature of meetings and key documents; broad definitions of the type of information that is accessible; reasonable fees and time limits; independent review of refusals to disclose information; and sanctions for noncompliance.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Groups in need of attention, limitations to the right to freedom of expression, and protection of journalists 2010, para. 38
- Paragraph text
- Accordingly, the Special Rapporteur considers that, in order to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, the right of access to electronic communications and freedom of opinion and expression in general must be guaranteed. It is therefore necessary to reduce the digital divide and the gap in technological progress between developed and developing nations, in line with the recommendations contained in the Millennium Declaration (General Assembly resolution 55/2, para. 20). In particular, target 5 of goal 8 states: "in cooperation with the private sector, make available the benefits of new technologies, especially information and communications".
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- While blocking and filtering measures deny access to certain content on the Internet, States have also taken measures to cut off access to the Internet entirely. The Special Rapporteur is deeply concerned by discussions regarding a centralized "on/off" control over Internet traffic. In addition, he is alarmed by proposals to disconnect users from Internet access if they violate intellectual property rights. This also includes legislation based on the concept of "graduated response", which imposes a series of penalties on copyright infringers that could lead to suspension of Internet service, such as the so-called "three-strikes-law" in France and the Digital Economy Act 2010 of the United Kingdom.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression exercised through the Internet 2011, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- However, while a notice-and-takedown system is one way to prevent intermediaries from actively engaging in or encouraging unlawful behaviour on their services, it is subject to abuse by both State and private actors. Users who are notified by the service provider that their content has been flagged as unlawful often have little recourse or few resources to challenge the takedown. Moreover, given that intermediaries may still be held financially or in some cases criminally liable if they do not remove content upon receipt of notification by users regarding unlawful content, they are inclined to err on the side of safety by over-censoring potentially illegal content. Lack of transparency in the intermediaries' decision-making process also often obscures discriminatory practices or political pressure affecting the companies' decisions. Furthermore, intermediaries, as private entities, are not best placed to make the determination of whether a particular content is illegal, which requires careful balancing of competing interests and consideration of defences.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
The implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression 2013, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- In this sense, restrictions on anonymity have a chilling effect, dissuading the free expression of information and ideas. They can also result in individuals' de facto exclusion from vital social spheres, undermining their rights to expression and information, and exacerbating social inequalities. Furthermore, restrictions on anonymity allow for the collection and compilation of large amounts of data by the private sector, placing a significant burden and responsibility on corporate actors to protect the privacy and security of such data.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 52
- Paragraph text
- States have taken a variety of approaches to paid political advertising. In some countries paid political advertising is a central pillar of political processes and is not strictly regulated. Other States, particularly those with a strong history of public broadcasting, have an outright prohibition of paid campaign advertising on radio and television. Some legal frameworks have taken a middle ground approach, putting in place financial limits on paid advertising spending, paired with rules on equitable pricing, timing, duration and scheduling of advertising. In other situations, it is the electoral authority which is mandated to allocate electoral publicity by channelling public funds to different contenders in proportion to previous election results, with basic minimum support assured for new parties.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to freedom of opinion and expression in electoral contexts 2014, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- The importance of ensuring access to the media as part of the electoral process is also well-established in a number of regional human rights instruments. The South African Development Community Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections, for example, reiterate that, in the conduct of democratic elections, all political parties should have access to State media (principle 2.1.5). The same principle is enshrined in article 17 of the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance, on the importance of ensuring access by political candidates and parties to State-controlled media during elections. The Declaration of Principles of Freedom of Expression in Africa also affirms that "the public service ambit of public broadcasters should be clearly defined and include an obligation to ensure that the public receive adequate, politically balanced information, particularly during election periods" (art. VI).
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 83
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur strongly encourages all stakeholders - whether State actors, private sector enterprises or civil society organizations and individuals - to take an active part in the development of the forthcoming projects. He particularly encourages stakeholders from less developed countries and vulnerable communities to share perspectives on the impact that the information and communication technology sector may have on the enjoyment of rights and the role that States may play in either interfering with or advancing those rights.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 9
- Paragraph text
- Human rights law does not as a general matter directly govern the activities or responsibilities of private business. A variety of initiatives provide guidance to enterprises to ensure compliance with fundamental rights. The Human Rights Council endorsed the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations "Protect, Respect and Remedy" Framework (see A/HRC/17/4 and A/HRC/17/31). Reflecting existing human rights law, the Guiding Principles reaffirm that States must ensure that not only State organs but also businesses under their jurisdiction respect human rights.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft 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)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- In addition to refraining from unnecessary and disproportionate restrictions on digital access, States also have a duty to ensure a free and open Internet. Network neutrality is the principle that all Internet data, content and services be treated equally and without improper discrimination. However, Internet service providers may deploy technologies that speed up or otherwise favour access to certain content and services, while slowing down others (a practice also known as "throttling"). The growing number of collaborations between Internet service providers and content-hosting platforms that offer free wireless data to access online content or services provided by the latter (also known as the provision of "zero rated" services) has attracted controversy. While such measures detract from the principle of net neutrality, it remains a subject of debate whether they may be permissible in areas genuinely lacking Internet access.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 50
- Paragraph text
- State regulation in this area is patchy and uncertain. A few States have recognized the general importance of network neutrality. Romania, for example, has stated that it is "in favour of all initiatives to guarantee that online information can be accessed in a meaningful way by the entire population". Fewer States have provided specific legal protection. In early 2016, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India issued a regulation prohibiting service providers from offering or charging "discriminatory tariffs for data services being offered or charged to the consumer on the basis of content". Some form of network neutrality has been adopted in law or policy by countries including Brazil, Chile, the Netherlands and the United States.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 2016, para. 78
- Paragraph text
- Companies that transmit, store or generate communications and other forms of user data - particularly telecommunication and Internet service providers, and content-hosting platforms - face mounting demands from law enforcement and security services for access to their customers' information. Future work will seek to identify approaches that could maximize the scope for freedom of expression while nonetheless addressing legitimate governmental interests in national security and public order.
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph