pushing for public reporting requirements, and building alliances with investigative media or legal advocacy groups to expose non-compliance. Internationally, trade agreements, aid conditionalities, or digital governance partnerships can apply pressure by tying collaboration to data protection standards. A partnership between EU and ASEAN should be considered and explored. However, this requires sustained transnational civil society engagement to ensure such standards are not only adopted but meaningfully implemented on the ground. Invest in Community-Based Digital Literacy Programs Closing the digital divide requires more than expanding internet access. It demands a focus on digital literacy that is locally grounded, culturally sensitive, and critically aware. Governments and development agencies should invest in community-based programs that go beyond technical skills to include topics such as online safety, recognizing misinformation, protecting personal data, and understanding one’s digital rights. Public-private partnerships in this aspect should also be explored since the private sector is generally more wellequipped than the public sector in terms of both technical and financial resources to carry out the programs. These efforts should be especially prioritized for vulnerable populations, such as rural residents, women, the elderly, informal workers, and displaced persons, who often face the highest exposure to digital threats but the least protection. Equipping citizens with the capacity to engage critically and safely in the digital world is crucial not only for empowerment, but for reducing susceptibility to online scams, exploitation, and misinformation. Establish Transparent and Participatory Tech Governance Frameworks To ensure that digital development is inclusive, ethical, and accountable, states should establish governance frameworks that are both transparent and participatory. This means creating multi-stakeholder oversight bodies that include civil society organizations, legal experts, technologists, representatives from marginalized communities, and human rights defenders. These bodies should have meaningful authority to assess and oversee the design, procurement, and deployment of AI and digital systems, particularly those with surveillance capabilities or affecting public services. They should have legal authority to halt or delay the deployment of AI and digital systems that fail to meet human rights, privacy, or equity benchmarks. They must be granted budgetary oversight of AI procurement and implementation, allowing them to scrutinize contracts, assess vendor accountability, and 9