International human rights standards ARTICLE 19 Freedom of expression and privacy under international human rights law The right to freedom of expression is guaranteed in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). It encompasses a right not only to express oneself but also to seek and receive information and ideas. This includes the right to express oneself online and to access information online. The right to privacy is protected in Article 12 of the UDHR and Article 17 of the ICCPR. The latter provides: ‘No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence’. States can restrict these rights only in limited circumstances. Freedom of expression may be restricted only according to a three-part test outlined in Article 19(3) of the ICCPR, namely where restrictions: (i) are provided for by law and formulated with sufficient precision to enable those covered by them to understand what is prohibited; (ii) pursue one of the legitimate aims explicitly enumerated in Article 19, such as national security, public order, or the rights or reputations of others; and (iii) are necessary (and proportionate) to protect that legitimate aim.1 Similarly, an interference with the right to privacy is legitimate only if it is prescribed by law, aims to protect a legitimate aim, and is necessary to achieve such protection.2 Both of these rights should be protected online as well as offline. 3 This means that restrictions on the rights in the online context should also be prescribed by law, aim to protect a legitimate aim, and be necessary to protect that aim. For freedom of expression, for example, official requirements to filter internet content are not sufficiently tailored and precise to pass the three-part test for restrictions. State-imposed filtering systems are a form of prior censorship that is not acceptable under human rights law.4 Blocking websites is also a means of silencing an author or publication, which can only be justified if it targets clearly illegal content that can be restricted under human rights law, such as explicit sexual images of children. Broader measures, such as blocking a widely used social media site, are disproportionate and have indiscriminate impacts, and so cannot be justified under the threepart test.5 ____________________________________________ 1 Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 34, 2011. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, A/HRC/39/29, 3 August 2018, para 10. 3 UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), Resolution 20/8, 16 July 2012. 4 Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and the Internet, 2011, para 3. 5 OHCHR, Report on Internet Shutdowns, 13 May 2022, para 13. 2 10