Previous 6 / 63 Next

Contents Contents Executive summary 3 Summary of recommendations 4 Introduction 8 International human rights standards 9 Freedom of expression and privacy under international human rights law 10 Freedom of expression and intermediary liability 11 Data protection 13 Human rights and the private sector 13 China 17 Country context 18 Legal obligations on tech companies 19 Tech company responses 23 Case study: Apple in China 25 Case study: Microsoft’s Bing in China 28 Vietnam 30 Country context 31 Legal obligations on tech companies 32 Tech company responses 34 Case study: Facebook in Vietnam 36 Case study: Data localisation in Vietnam 38 Myanmar 40 Country context 41 Legal obligations on tech companies 42 Tech company responses 45 Case study: Platform reactions to military content after the 2021 coup 47 Case study: Telenor in Myanmar 50 Tech company responses and the UN Guiding Principles 52 Deferring to local laws when explaining actions in violation of human rights 53 Lack of transparency 54 Lack of country-specific human rights due diligence 55 6

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Engaging tech for internet freedom in authoritarian countries

Report

Preview

Language

English

Topic

Information Operation
Internet Restrictions

Author(s)

Article 19

Date Published: Oct 5, 2024

Abstract: In this report, ARTICLE 19 reviews the human rights context and responsibilities of tech companies operating in 3 authoritarian countries in Asia, namely China, Myanmar, and Vietnam. It focuses on the rights to freedom of expression and privacy, and the manner in which authoritarian states directly or indirectly expect companies to assist them in censoring content, promoting propaganda, accessing user data, and engaging in surveillance. While these are undoubtedly highly challenging contexts, companies have not sufficiently prioritised protecting human rights in their policies and actions. States are the primary duty bearers under international human rights law, but companies also have human rights responsibilities, as outlined in the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). Even if domestic law or circumstances make it impossible for companies to fully meet their human rights responsibilities, they should take action so as to respect human rights standards to the greatest extent possible. Tech companies should not merely reference local law as an excuse for collaborating in rights violations. They should take steps such as those detailed in this report, like adopting appropriate policies, asking governments to justify content removal requests clearly and specifically, and reporting transparently on their compliance with government demands. For each country, we survey the country context and provide an overview of legal obligations which companies operate under that are problematic from the perspective of international human rights law and that may, as a result, put pressure on companies to become complicit in violations of the rights to freedom of expression and privacy. We then explore how Western tech companies operating in these countries, many of which have explicitly stated their commitment to respecting freedom of expression and privacy, have responded to these legal obligations and to other government expectations that they will cooperate in violations of these rights.

Link: source

Primary Documents

ETIF-Thematic-Report-12Sep-24.pdf
English
Download View

Myanmar Internet Project

Select target paragraph3

Engaging tech for internet freedom in authoritarian countries

Primary Documents

Notifications