ARTICLE 19 presents 2 new reports examining the human rights responsibilities of tech companies operating in authoritarian countries – part of our Engaging Tech for Internet Freedom (ETIF) project.
Our first report looks at how repressive governments in Asia – with a particular focus on China, Myanmar, and Vietnam – regularly violate the rights of their people online: censoring content, spreading state propaganda, and undertaking mass surveillance. What’s more, they expect tech companies to facilitate this repression, with catastrophic consequences for people’s right to speak and to know.
Human rights are not the exclusive purview of states; the private sector also has responsibilities. Yet as our report reveals, too many tech companies are complying with the requests of these governments, often pointing to damaging local laws to justify their practices.
It’s time for tech companies to stop corroborating with digital dictators and start protecting their users in repressive regimes.
Our regional report shows how.
Myanmar: How civil society can resist the surveillance state
In our second report, ARTICLE 19 reveals how, since seizing power in 2021, Myanmar’s military junta has deployed mass surveillance against its own people and acquired an arsenal of digital weapons that it uses against its opponents: pro-democracy supporters, activists, and journalists.
We examine the surveillance state created by the junta and set out how, by engaging with ICT companies, civil society can protect human rights in Myanmar.
China: Isolation by design in Apple’s App Store
AppleCensorship (an ARTICLE 19 partner on the ETIF project) delves into the intricate landscape of censorship within Apple’s App Store in China.
Their report examines how apps featuring content that the Chinese government deems ‘sensitive’ (such as political dissent, ethnic minorities, and LGBTQ+ issues) are being removed from the App Store, and reveals a troubling lack of transparency regarding Apple’s decision-making and interactions with the Chinese authorities.
Vietnam: Foreign tech companies failing users
Legal Initiatives for Vietnam (an ARTICLE 19 partner on the ETIF project) sheds light on how foreign tech companies have faced increasing pressure from the Vietnamese government regarding content moderation, access to users’ data, and manipulation of online discussion.
Their report exposes how tech companies’ failures to address these issues is effectively contributing to the development of digital authoritarianism in Vietnam.
What should governments in the region do?
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 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.
Take measures to prevent harassment, threats, or violence against human rights defenders and journalists – and immediately and unconditionally release individuals who have been wrongly detained or imprisoned solely for exercising their right to freedom of expression and other human rights.
What should tech companies operating in authoritarian contexts do?
In accordance with the UN Guiding Principles.
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.
Including specific standards for responding to government requests to remove content. These policies and procedures should reflect the principles articulated in the Santa Clara Principles.
These policies should include reasonable efforts to resist such requests, such as a commitment to evaluate each request individually and challenge the legality of requests as appropriate.
Transparency reports should be more regular (ideally monthly) and more detailed than is currently standard practice. They should include country-specific commentary on steps taken to comply with and challenge local law, as well as more details on content that has been removed at the request of both governments and users.
Companies should also be transparent about how they negotiate the conditions for market access, as well as any licences, contracts, or permissions they receive from the government.
Implement privacy by design and empower users to control their personal data.
Including rapid responses and assistance when human rights concerns are raised by local or regional staff.
Such as through providing financial support and technical expertise and collaborating with civil society and other human rights defenders.
And pursue initiatives designed to enhance industry-wide collaboration on human rights issues.
In an era where human rights are increasingly threatened by new technologies, the responsibility of tech companies cannot be understated.
Our findings show the urgent need to realign business practices with the fundamental principles of human rights.
Find out more
Malaysia: CSOs welcome the tabling of the Malaysian Media Council Bill
Malaysia: Passage of Online Safety Bill a grave blow to free expression
Malaysia: Concerns with the Online Safety Bill 2024
Malaysia: International Human Rights Day 2024 – Our rights today shape our future tomorrow
Malaysia: CMA Amendments are a step backwards for freedom of expression
