“Internet Shutdowns”

Delegation of the European Union (666 3rd Avenue)

I thank the European Union and the Czech Republic for organizing this event and for inviting me to address the specific topic of internet shutdowns.

Why are internet shutdowns a human rights issue and why should their imposition be a concern for all of us?

Allow me to start with a quote by the ancient Greek politician, Themistocles: “He who commands the sea has command of everything”.

Today, access to the internet has in many ways taken on a similar role to that of the sea in Themistocles’s time: The internet enables trade and development, interactions between people, access to services and the exchange of ideas and education. The importance of connectivity is recognized by the Sustainable Development Goals, and reinforces States’ human rights obligations to work towards universal and accessible internet.

To deliberately shut down access to the internet – whether through full shutdown, bandwidth throttling, blocking of mobile services or other means – is a powerful tool of control. Control over what kind of information can be accessed or shared, and with far-reaching consequences on a range of human rights, including social, economic and cultural rights. Given the increasing reliance of businesses and trade on digital technologies, shutdowns furthermore have considerable impact on the economy by disrupting financial transactions, commerce and industry, creating an uncertain environment for investment.

Over the past years, civil society organizations have documented the impact of shutdowns on the situation and rights of individuals and their broader societal impact. Since 2016, the #KeepItOn coalition – encompassing over 280 civil society organizations from 150 countries – has systematically recorded episodes of Internet shutdowns in a public database after corroboration.  Thanks to their important work, we have more insight into the non-transparent practice and effects of internet shutdowns.

The coalition has recorded over 255 shutdowns during public demonstrations relating to social, political or economic grievances. Across all regions, governments have used internet shutdowns almost as a default response to deal with opposition and dissent. Oftentimes, it occurs in places where channels for democratic participation are weak in law or practice. It sometimes acts as a shield against accountability by governments. Generally speaking, shutdowns are found to be imposed without much transparency, justification or judicial or democratic oversight.

In a report presented to the 50th session of the Human Rights Council this June, our Office analysed the causes, legal implications and impacts of internet shutdowns on human rights. Building on previous work undertaken by the former Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression, David Kaye, and the Special Rapporteur on association and peaceful assembly, Clement Voule, the report identifies concrete recommendations for ending shutdowns and mitigating their impact. It outlines that, over the past decade, internet shutdowns tend to occur in particular contexts, including during periods of conflict or heightened political tensions, such as around elections or during large-scale protests. The inability to document or report human rights violations and abuses during such periods can contribute to further violence and, at worst, atrocities.

Some consequences of internet shutdowns across various sectors of society may be more unintended or ignored, but are no less serious. For instance, internet shutdowns compromise the health and welfare system. They impede access to emergency health support or access to support services, disrupt the delivery of essential medicines and necessary communication between health professionals.

Shutdowns also greatly impact the ability of international humanitarian actors and local aid organizations to provide assistance. Shutdowns disrupt supply chains, including financial channels, that are critical to the delivery of goods and services. The World Bank recently calculated that Internet shutdowns in Myanmar alone had cost nearly $2.8 billion between February and December 2021, reversing economic progress made over the previous decade.

Internet shutdowns cause profound damage to our societies. Given their indiscriminate and disproportionate impact, governments should refrain from imposing shutdowns. It is a tool that is very hard to justify, if at all, under international human rights law.

In addition, there is a pressing need to bridge the work to end internet shutdowns with the work related to internet connectivity. The Secretary-General’s report on “Our Common Agenda” underscores the importance of universal access to the Internet as an enabler of human rights. In addition to calling for accelerated efforts to connect those without Internet access, the Secretary-General emphasized the commitment of the United Nations to work with Governments, business and civil society to reduce disruptions to Internet services.

Our June report to the HRC is one step in meeting this commitment and can guide joint efforts of all stakeholders. In follow up to “Our Common Agenda”, our Office is also working across the UN system to develop multistakeholder approaches to addressing the challenges of Internet shutdowns.  Advocacy, awareness-raising and coalition building are crucial to end shutdowns. As an example of partnerships, our Office and the EU launched a campaign against internet shutdowns in June. Please join us on 26 September at a great web event, co-organized with the EU, where we will delve deeper into what to do about shutdowns.

Ending the practice of internet shutdowns is not enough, however. Equally important, is to focus on bridging the global inequalities when it comes to access to the internet and connectivity. Despite the commitment under the SDGs, by 2021, only 2 of 46 least developed countries had met the target on universal and affordable Internet access. For example, only 19.1 per cent of the population in least developed countries have Internet access, compared with 86.6 per cent in developed countries. Addressing this global inequality requires investment in communications infrastructure and establishment of partnerships between financing agencies, States and the telecommunications industry.

Many of the priority countries for connectivity assistance are often the same that resort to shutdowns. For example, at least eight countries receiving World Bank support for connectivity expansion have implemented shutdowns, including during electoral periods.

Going forward, a range of different actors have important roles to play.

Ultimately, States bear the primary responsibility for the protection and promotion of human rights, which includes ensuring human rights compliant approaches to ensuring an accessible internet. The financial and societal gains of an open and accessible internet far outweigh what governments may deem as short-term gains of internet shutdowns, which  undermine advances in cultural, economic, social and political life.

Civil society has played an indispensable role in collecting information on internet shutdowns, challenging disruption orders in court and advocating to end Internet shutdowns. Their work merits recognition and additional technical and financial support.

Companies/businesses should take all possible lawful measures to prevent shutdowns that they have been asked to implement, and, to the greatest extent possible, prevent or mitigate possible adverse human rights impacts. They should also seek to enable the full disclosure of information about the interferences and disruptions and undertake due diligence to assess and act upon the human rights risks thereof.

Development agencies and donors, whenever they seek to expand communications networks and close the global digital divide, are encouraged to integrate human rights considerations into their efforts, bearing in mind the possibility of State-mandated disruptions of digital services. This can be done by ensuring that the risks of internet shutdowns are considered when designing and implementing cooperation programmes related to internet connectivity; and by including references to human rights standards when supporting the development of legal and institutional frameworks.

These are some ways in which governments and other actors can exercise their responsibility and power to ensure that access to the internet is expanded and can remain without undue hindrance.

The “command of the sea” is ultimately a positive responsibility, aimed at keeping internet accessible and navigable for all. Let us work together to ensure an open, safe and accessible internet for all.