Tag: International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance

In a new op-ed published at Slate, David Kaye, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on the freedom of expression, and Brett Solomon, our executive director, argue that in global policy, connecting the developing world to the internet isn’t enough. Respect for human rights must go “hand in glove” with the drive to connection.

Today Access recognizes the individuals and groups that have either been champions of the 13 internationally recognized principles for human rights in communications surveillance (“Heroes”), or have undermined or violated those principles (“Villains”). These principles, called the International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance (or “the Principles”), have been endorsed by more than 400 civil society groups worldwide. They provide a framework for assessing whether government surveillance practices comply with international human rights obligations. Today marks the two-year anniversary of the Principles, which were publicly released on September 22, 2013.

Access congratulates the United States Senate for approving the USA FREEDOM Act of 2015.

Surveillance impacts everyone, especially the most vulnerable and at-risk populations. It is past time that all users demand action, domestically as well as internationally, for the universal respect of human rights.

For the second straight year, the United Nations has declared that government communications surveillance poses a threat to the right to privacy.

Individuals around the world work to advance, undermine Principles

As the International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance make clear, the preservation of the integrity of communications and systems is a key obligation under international law. Just as it would be unreasonable for governments to insist that all residents of houses should leave their doors unlocked just in case the police need to search a particular property, or to require all persons to install surveillance cameras in their houses on the basis that it might be useful to future prosecutions, it is equally disproportionate for governments to interfere with the integrity of everyone’s communications in order to facilitate its investigations or to require the identification of users as a precondition for service provision or the retention of all customer data.

States have lagged far behind other stakeholders when it comes to reporting on their surveillance activity, especially on national security matters.

On April 8, 2014, Europe’s highest court, the ECJ, released a long-awaited decision on the controversial Data Retention Directive, confirming what we all knew: the blanket surveillance mandated by the Data Retention Directive is neither necessary nor proportionate.

The process for sharing criminal investigation information between countries is broken: official exchanges between nations are slow, underfunded, and lacking in user protections. Human rights are at risk.