Previous 60 / 63 Next

Recommendations ARTICLE 19 Recommendations for governments in the region Governments in the region should: • revise their legal frameworks to bring them into line with international human rights standards, including on freedom of expression and privacy; • recognise their responsibilities under the first pillar of the UN Guiding Principles (UNGPs) and human rights law, and avoid compelling or pressuring companies to breach their human rights responsibilities; • foster universal access to an open internet, avoiding shutdowns and unnecessary restrictions on online platforms, and facilitating a vibrant online ecosystem; and • protect human rights defenders and activists, including by taking measures to prevent harassment, threats, or violence against them and immediately and unconditionally releasing individuals who have been wrongly detained or imprisoned solely for exercising their right to freedom of expression and other human rights. Recommendations for tech companies operating in authoritarian contexts Tech companies operating in authoritarian contexts should: • uphold human rights standards in accordance with the UNGPs; • conduct human rights due diligence, including by undertaking regular human rights impact assessments; these should be country specific and disclosed publicly, the process should be transparent and should involve meaningful consultation with affected stakeholders, and once assessments are completed, effective measures should be put in place to mitigate identified risks; • develop, publish, and fairly apply clear policies and procedures for content moderation, including specific standards for responding to government requests to remove content, and ensure that they reflect the principles articulated in the Santa Clara Principles; • develop clear policies on how they will respond to government requests to restrict services or share user data that include reasonable efforts to resist such requests, such as a commitment to evaluate each request individually and challenge the legality of requests as appropriate; • prioritise transparency and accountability: transparency reports should be more regular and more detailed than is currently standard practice and should include country-specific commentary on steps taken to comply with and challenge local law, as well as more detail on content which has been removed at the request of both governments and users; companies should also be transparent about how they negotiate and the conditions for 60

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