|
What are some impacts of internet showdowns?
|
| bet | 3/3 | | Sana | 24.12.2019 | | Hajmi | 349,46 Kb. | | #4700 |
What are some impacts of internet showdowns?
A complete delineation of the impacts of internet shutdowns lies beyond the scope of this submission. However, researchers have focused on three main areas where shutdowns have adverse impacts: human rights, democracies, and economies.
Shutdowns threaten the right to life, and often precede atrocities
Without the ability to call emergency services or loved ones, or access information, individuals suffering under network shutdowns are put at risk of physical, psychological, and emotional damage.
One documented case shows the horrific consequences shutdowns can have: in Pakistan, a pregnant woman was unable to contact her doctor about complications, and lost her child.59 We must assume more cases of similar, egregious harms occur without documentation.
The circumstances that commonly accompany shutdowns, which often take place during public demonstrations and political events, add to an environment of instability that states too often exploit. We have noted a stark pattern of abuse: threatened by public protests or political crises, a government will order telecommunication providers to shut down or degrade networks to unusable levels. Once the disruption takes hold, and a cover of darkness impedes the flow of information in and out of the targeted country or region, police and armed forces intensify repression through tactics that can give rise to grave human rights abuses. This sinister pattern has unfortunately been repeated: some examples include Myanmar in 2007, Iran in 2009, Egypt in 2011, Sudan in 2013,60 Central African Republic in 2014, and Ethiopia in 2016.61
For instance, in Sudan, protests in Khartoum and elsewhere grew after an increase in petrol prices. The government responded by attacking traditional print media outlets, beginning on September 19, 2013, and shutting down the internet a few days later. A violent government crackdown against public demonstrations took place on September 25, 2013, resulting in dozens of deaths.
Likewise, an SMS shutdown in Central African Republic that began in June 2014 preceded and continued during a “fresh wave of sectarian violence” in that country.62
Access Now submitted evidence of this disturbing trend to the International Criminal Court as part of our investigation into crimes against humanity in the Central African Republic in 2015.63 We encourage more national, regional, and international jurists to document the connection between shutdowns and atrocities, identify steps toward more timely detection and prevention, and end the impunity for those responsible.
Shutdowns do lasting damage to democracy and political participation
The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights extols a broad individual right to political participation, which is directly linked to the freedoms of association and expression.64
Shutting down the internet or otherwise controlling the free flow of information online during an election period is a profound violation of a number of human rights, and a threat to democratic processes and government legitimacy. It prevents election monitors, and ordinary citizens, from reporting fraud or irregularities at polling places. Opposition candidates and parties cannot communicate with supporters or expose and document illegal activity. Journalists are impeded in their work gathering news from sources, and reporting to editors inside and outside the country. The short duration of elections present a particularly effective opportunity for temporary and targeted shutdowns to inflict lasting damage on democracies.
Civil society is pushing back. Lawsuits have been filed in Uganda following election-related shutdowns there this year. Stakeholders in Ghana, incensed by police threats to shut down social media, won a hugely important victory when the president of Ghana told voters that the government has no intention of shutting down social media on election day. More of this type of preventive advocacy is needed to make clear that shutdowns are not a lawful option for governments to exercise, especially during elections.
Shutdowns slow economic development and the digital economy
A growing number of economic reports compose a detailed mosaic showing the broad and deep impacts that shutdowns inflict on economies:
A recent Brookings Institution report documented that shutdowns had drained USD $2.4 billion from the global economy between 2015 and 2016.65 The estimates for loss, which the report acknowledges are conservative, show that India alone lost nearly $1 billion because of its repeated disruptions, which fly in the face of President Narendra Modi’s stated commitment to supporting the internet economy through his party’s Digital India program.
The Global Network Initiative, working with the accounting firm Deloitte and supported by Facebook, estimates in a new report that countries with high connectivity and high per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) can lose up to USD $141 million per day of disruption, falling to $20 million per day in countries with medium connectivity and medium per capita GDP, and $3 million per day in low-connectivity countries with low per capita GDP.
During a recent shutdown in Uganda surrounding presidential elections, the government blocked social media and mobile money at an estimated loss of USD $23 million per day to mobile banking companies alone.66 The shutdown lasted three days.
In an analysis of shutdowns in Pakistan conducted in collaboration with ICT company Telenor Pakistan, the Institute for Human Rights and Business67 highlighted that telecom companies lost USD $25 million in the shutdown during Eid in August 2012 alone.
When shutdowns are longer, they have multiplier effects rippling throughout the economy, because they impact the confidence of users, businesses, and even foreign investors.
Of course, looking at shutdowns solely through an economic lens risks ignoring human rights violations. A “digital curfew” that keep the internet “open for business” during the day but shuts it down at night — when internet users and activists gather online to communicate — still infringes the freedoms of opinion and expression. This happened in Gabon throughout September 2016.
Who is speaking out against shutdowns?
A growing chorus of global voices condemn the individuals and entities that order internet shutdowns, document how they damage on societies and economies, and are at work drafting laws and strengthening norms against these disruptions.
International institutions and experts
Intergovernmental bodies and appointed experts are issuing statements, resolutions, and communications to condemn internet shutdowns. Below is a sample of recent, newsmaking events:
The United Nations Human Rights Council "unequivocally condemned" communications disruptions in its July 2016 resolution on the freedom of expression and the internet
In the 2015 Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and Responses to Conflict Situations, UN experts and rapporteurs declared that “kill switches” can never be justified under human rights law, even during times of conflict.68 The 2011 Joint Declaration found “mandatory blocking” of certain technologies and platforms like social networking to be “an extreme measure” strictly subject to international law.69
The Freedom Online Coalition has called strongly condemned “restrictions in violation of human rights law of content shared via social media, and in particular the wholesale blocking of social media sites.”70
The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights expressed concern that the government of Ethiopia “once again blocked internet throughout the country in response to the protests” and called on the government to “unblock internet in the country.”71
In their March 2016 report to the Human Rights Council, the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association and the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions called out the practice of blocking communications networks before and during protests.72
Private companies, business associations, and civil society organizations
For their part, companies and private associations, as well as NGOs and public policy think tanks, are speaking out against shutdowns and documenting their social and economic costs:
The Global Network Initiative and Telecommunications Industry Dialogue issued a Joint Statement on Network and Service Shutdowns, finding they undermine security and public safety, threaten free expression, restrict access to vital emergency, payment and health services, and disrupt contact with family members and friends.73
The GSMA, one of the world’s largest technology associations, laid out strict standards for orders issued to telcos to restrict service, relegating them to “exceptional and pre-defined circumstances, and only if absolutely necessary and proportionate to achieve a specified and legitimate aim consistent with internationally recognised human rights and relevant laws.”74
Access Now joined UK-charity ShareAction to release an investor briefing on the legal, financial, and reputational risks associated with shutdowns.75
#KeepItOn Coalition
The #KeepitOn Coalition is a voluntary campaign that consists of more than 100 civil society groups from nearly 50 countries who have joined together to fight internet shutdowns. Many organizations work in countries that are directly affected by shutdowns, including in Latin America, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East / North Africa region. Some are grassroots groups with just one staff member and volunteers, while others are established international organizations. The coalition aims to raise awareness about shutdowns, and to push back against them at the government level, and with key stakeholders such as telecommunications companies and investors.
Legislators and judges
Legislators are not waiting for their governments to voluntarily curtail the practice of ordering internet shutdowns.
In Nigeria, the Digital Rights and Freedoms Bill affirms access to the internet as essential to human rights and Nigeria’s economy.76 In support of the law, Congressperson Honourable Chukwuemeka Ujam, PhD wrote that, “millions of dollars accruing to Internet businesses and the economy was lost during the social media shutdown during the Ugandan Presidential elections of February 2016… Africa, with its severe economic and developmental challenges, cannot afford economic losses in any of its sectors – developed or nascent.” The bill, which has passed through a second reading, specifically prohibits internet shutdowns and throttling.
We expect more laws and regulations like this to explicitly erase the government’s legal basis to order internet shutdowns, and more judges to uphold these laws and find that shutdowns violate national and international protections on the freedoms of opinion and expression.
Conclusion
Internet shutdowns threaten human rights, lives, and livelihoods.
For governments, transparency is the first step toward accountability for internet shutdowns. Governments should review their laws and clarify for providers and the general public what their powers are to shut down and control networks at all times, including emergencies. This would start inclusive dialogue on the problem, and better communicate the risks for all stakeholders. The process of carrying out a national baseline assessment for the creation of National Action Plans on Business & Human Rights is a good opportunity to conduct this type of review and transparency effort. Once this review of existing law is completed and public, legislators may take heed of the opportunity to pass legislation to ban internet shutdowns and related disruptions, and to close any remaining loopholes in the law that allow them.
For his part, we encourage the Special Rapporteur to use the upcoming report on the responsibilities of infrastructure and access providers to clearly establish that intentional disruptions of communications in the form of internet shutdowns violate the freedoms of opinion and expression. All UN member states, the Human Rights Council, the Special Procedures, and other stakeholders must coordinate their efforts to end this destructive trend.
***
Access Now (www.accessnow.org) is an international organization that defends and extends the digital rights of users at risk around the world. By combining innovative policy, global advocacy, and direct technical support, we fight for open and secure communications for all.
For more information, contact:
Peter Micek | Global Policy & Legal Counsel | peter@accessnow.org
Deji Olukotun | Senior Global Advocacy Manager | deji@accessnow.org
Thanks to Deniz Aydin and Alyse Rankin for their research, writing, and editing necessary to create this document.
|
| |
