Human Rights PDF

Human Rights Fundamentals of Human Rights Human rights may be generally defined as those rights which are inherent in our nature and without which we cannot live as human beings. Human rights and fundamental freedoms allow us to develop fully and use our human qualities, our intelligence, our talents and our conscience and to satisfy our spiritual and other needs. They are based on humankind’s increasing demand for a life in which the inherent dignity and worth of each human being are respect and protection. Their denial is not only an individual and personal tragedy but also creates conditions of social and political unrest, planting the seeds of violence and conflict within and between societies and nations. Types of Human Rights: 1) The human right to own land: Land and property rights are considered among the most important rights that a person must have. Without this right, a person will not feel safe. A person may go out to work and come back and find another person in his home who has claimed it as his own, or anyone may be able to seize other people’s property with ease, as much research around the world has shown that the right to own land is a reason for development. Development and increased productivity. 2) The human right to express one’s opinion: The United States considers freedom to express one’s opinion to be one of the most important freedoms that a person must have, and the right to vote comes in second place. As for Germany, it has unanimously agreed that the right to expression has greater value, as a result of voting in a poll by the organization 2016 AD in the United States and seven European countries. 3) The human right to a fair trial: The right to a fair trial is ranked second in importance in Britain, while in Denmark, Germany, and the United States the right to a fair trial came in fourth place, according to the above poll. 4) The right to nationality: Every individual has the right to nationality, and it is not permissible to deprive a person of his nationality arbitrarily, or deny his right to change it. 5) The right to work: The state must protect individuals from unemployment, give them their right to work, and the individual has the freedom to choose his work, so that his working conditions are fair and satisfactory. 6) The right to movement: Every person has the right to move and reside within the borders of his country freely, and the right to leave his country and return to it. 7) The right to education: Every person has the right to education. Education must be provided free of charge at least in the primary and basic levels. Primary education is compulsory, and technical and vocational education is available to the public. 8) The human right to equality and non-discrimination. 9) The human right to food, housing, and health. 10) Human freedom and right to religion and beliefs. 11) The human right to obtain social security. 2 12) The right to an adequate standard of living. 13) The human right to have a space of privacy. 14) The right of the people to participate in government. 1 The main objectives of the human rights components are: 1_ Human rights include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture, freedom of opinion and expression, the right to work and education, and much more. Every human being has the right to these rights without discrimination. 2_ The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a landmark document. For the first time, the world has a universally agreed upon document that stipulates that all human beings are free and equal regardless of sex, color, belief, religion, or other characteristics. 3_Enabling the state and other national institutions to implement their human rights obligations and uphold the rule of law; 4_Help build a culture of human rights in countries to achieve sustainable and lasting peace and security; 5_Empowering residents to claim and obtain their human rights. In Egypt 6_ The Permanent Supreme Committee for Human Rights in Egypt aims to prepare and follow up on the implementation of an integrated approach to 1 https://sschr.gov.eg/about/mission-and- vision/#:~:text=%D8%AA%D8%B3%D8%AA%D9%87%D8%AF%D9%81%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84 %D8%AC%D9%86%D8%A9%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%8A%D8%A7%20%D8%A7% D9%84%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%A6%D9%85%D8%A9%20%D9%84%D8%AD%D9%82%D9%88%D9%8 2,%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%84%D9%8A%D8%A9%20%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D8 %A5%D9%82%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%A9%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D9%86% D8%B6%D9%85%D8%A9%20%D8%A5%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%87%D8%A7%20%D9%85%D8%B5%D8 %B1. 3 promote, respect and protect all civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights and freedoms included in the constitution, national legislation and international and regional agreements to which Egypt is a party. 7_ The Supreme Committee works to achieve this vision by conducting an assessment of the level of implementation of all those rights and freedoms by reviewing the legislation and executive policies related to them, examining their actual implementation, and collecting relevant data and indicators, classifying and analyzing them. 8_ The Supreme Committee also seeks to identify good practices in the field of respect and protection of human rights. 9_As well as identifying the existing challenges and then proposing the necessary legislative, executive and institutional measures and procedures to enhance the implementation and enforcement of human rights on the ground. Importance of Human Rights: 1. Human rights guarantee that people's basic needs are met: The individual has the right to live a decent life in his country and to have his basic requirements available, such as medicine, food, water, clothing, and shelter. There are still millions of people who lack the previous minimum basic life requirements, and this problem falls under the terms of human rights. man; So activists, volunteers and others are moving to provide these necessities to everyone. 2. Human rights encourage freedom of speech and expression: Every person has the right to express his or her opinion freely without fear of repercussions or without fear of being in danger as a result of his or her government's reaction to his or her opinions. 4 This includes the expression of all ideas and forms of expression regardless of whether everyone is able to Accepted and approved, human rights protect everyone who wishes to discuss or dispute certain ideas that exist in their society. 3. Human rights reflect the minimum standards necessary to live in dignity: Human rights guarantee living in dignity for individuals. In addition to their interest in ensuring the provision of all basic necessities such as food, housing, and education, they focus on their right to choose the way they deem appropriate to live, the appropriate way to express their opinion, and choose the type of government they want, and guarantee Human rights include livelihood, freedom, equality, and security. It protects them from human rights violations committed by those stronger than them, and other matters that enable them to remain in the best condition, thus making the most of the opportunities available to them, and ensuring that they are able to use and develop their human values; Such as intelligence, talent, and conscience. 4. Human rights are an important part of how people interact with others: Many of the values provided by human rights help society get rid of differences within it. Some of these values are tolerance, respect, and equality. These values transform society and make it more open and tolerant. In recent decades, work has increased human rights and their application, which has a positive impact on societies. There is no doubt that when society understands human rights, There is no doubt that when society understands human rights, this will contribute to the progress of the members of this society, finding solutions to many of their problems, and it will be 5 easier for them to promote justice and the well-being of society. Human rights also regulate how people interact with others at all levels, whether in school, Or in society, within the family, in the workplace, or at higher levels such as politics and international relations. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states in its final article that “No State, group or person shall have the right to engage in any activity or action aimed at destroying any of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention,” which confirms that no person’s human rights can be taken away. Of course, this does not mean that human rights violations and violations do not occur. It is still possible to hear about tragic stories about murder, violence, racism, hunger, unemployment, poverty, abuse, homelessness, and discrimination on television and newspapers. 5. Human rights provide protection. Basic human rights guarantee protection for individuals: They are the rules that direct them to the correct way to act. They are like a judge who can be appealed to. They are certainly available and present to everyone, regardless of all the circumstances surrounding them. They may sometimes be likened to the nature that no one can appreciate. Despite its violation or like a spirit that cannot be destroyed, it offers respect to everyone and demands that others be treated with respect. Some may differ in how to define it, but everyone who follows it is easy to recognize. It is followed by everyone who speaks of respect, goodness, justice, and truth. 6. Ignoring human rights contributes to increased violence: Peoples struggle to establish societies in which human beings enjoy freedom of expression, freedom of belief, and freedom from fear, while recognition of the inherent dignity and equal and 6 inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, and that any neglect in this matter will lead to Atrocities that anger the conscience of all humanity, due to the struggle and oppression of peoples. The Universal Declaration and other human rights treaties cannot be treated as mere noble aspirations. Rather, they are basic legal principles, and their international human rights obligations must be fulfilled. Therefore, some countries have incorporated these principles into their own laws. This provides an opportunity for individuals to file human rights complaints. By the courts of their country, individuals from some countries can also file a complaint about human rights violations to a United Nations committee of experts, which will give its opinion on this. Human rights-related work Some of the core activities undertaken by the Human Rights Section include: 1_Conduct human rights monitoring, investigations and analyses; 2_Issuing general reports on the human rights situation in the country as well as on issues of special concern; 3_Collect human rights data and feed it into mission-level analysis and early warning mechanisms, including preventing any harm to the population; 4_Providing human rights advice, supporting institutional reform and national capacity building, supporting the establishment and strengthening of accountability mechanisms, and working closely with host governments, national institutions and civil society; 5_Providing advice and assistance to other mission teams in the field of integrating human rights into the tasks assigned to them. 7 Human Rights education may be defined as: These are the rights that must be provided to every individual, regardless of his nationality, gender, religion, language, race, color, or place of residence. These rights are also legally protected and internationally recognized, and the government must ensure that human rights are met, protected and promoted. For individuals and groups. “training and information efforts aimed at the building of a universal culture of human rights through the imparting of knowledge and skills and attitudes, directed to: (a) The strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; (b) The full development of the human personality and the sense of its dignity; (c) The promotion of understanding, tolerance, gender equality and friendship among all nations, peoples and racial, national, ethnic, religious and linguistic groups; (d) The enabling of all persons to participate effectively in a free society; (e) The furtherance of the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.” Most multidimensional UN peace operations include human rights as a civilian component. Human rights components of peace operations implement human rights mandates granted to missions by the United Nations Security Council and help mainstream human rights into all mission activities. What is human rights education? 8 Human rights are the basic freedoms and protections that all people are entitled to. They are rights that we all have whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, sexual orientation or any other status. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are all related to one another, dependent upon one another and indivisible from one another.1 Human rights are closely related to Australian values – values such as justice, equality, a fair go and democracy. Human rights education aims to build an understanding and appreciation for human rights through learning about rights and learning through rights.2 Human rights education is inextricably linked with the pedagogy of teaching. It requires not just imparting knowledge about human rights but also applying a human rights-based pedagogy to ensure young people learn in a rights- respecting environment – an environment that respects their rights and promotes the rights of others. There are three main elements of human rights education: first, the acquisition of knowledge and skills about human rights second, the development of respectful values and attitudes and changed behaviour that reflects human rights values, and 1 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 (at http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml); International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 (at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cescr.htm); International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966 (at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm) 2 Julie McLeod and Ruth Reynolds use the term ‘peaceful pedagogy’ to describe a model for learning about, through and for human rights. Julie McLeod and Ruth Reynolds, Peaceful Pedagogy: Teaching Human Rights through the Curriculum (2010). Similar language is used in United Nations General Assembly, Draft Plan of Action for the First Phase (2005–2007) of the World Programme for Human Rights Education, UN GAOR, 59th session, UN Doc A/59/525/Rev.1, 2 March 2005, which sees ‘three task fields of human rights education: learning over, by and for human rights’. 9 third, the motivation of social action and empowerment of active citizenship to advance respect for the rights of all.1 Human rights education encourages using human rights as a frame of reference in our relationships with others. It encourages inquiry, forming arguments, deciding, cooperating, evaluating, sharing and living according to values. Human Human dignity affirms that all people deserve to dignity be respected simply because they are human beings. Regardless of age, culture, religion, ethic origin, colour, sex, sexual orientation, language, ability, social status, civil status or political convictions, all individuals deserve respect. Universality Human rights are fundamental rights that belong to every person simply because they are a human being. Human rights are based on the principle that every human being is born equal in dignity and rights. All human rights are equally important and they should not be taken away under any circumstances. 1 United Nations Human Rights Council, Draft plan of action for the second phase (2010-2014) of the World Programme for Human Rights Education, A/HRC/15/28, 27 July 2010. At http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/education/training/secondphase.htm (viewed 13 May 2011). 10 Equality and Equality affirms that all human beings are born non- free and equal. Equality presupposes that all discriminatio individuals have the same rights and deserve n the same level of respect. All people have the right to be treated equally. Sometimes it may be necessary to treat people differently to achieve equality. This is because differences between people may make it difficult for them to enjoy their rights without support. For example, everyone may have the right to employment but without accessible transport and facilities for people with physical disabilities, they may not be able to enjoy this right. Non-discrimination is an integral part of the principle of equality. It ensures that no one is denied their rights because of factors such as age, ethic origin, sex, etc. The failure to account for differences between people with a view to ensuring that everyone is able to enjoy their rights may also be discriminatory. Respect and Human rights entail both rights and obligations. responsibility Respect is recognising that every person is important and must be treated with dignity. In the context of human rights, respect does not need to be earned; it is the right of every person in all circumstances. It includes recognising and appreciating differences between people. 11 Responsibility means that we need to also respect the human rights of others. All people have human rights and we all have a responsibility to respect the rights of others. Accountabilit The government is accountable to all people in y Australia as well as the international community through the United Nations human rights system, for ensuring that everyone in Australia is able to enjoy their human rights. Participation Everybody has the right to participate fully and on an equal basis with others in all areas of life. Full and equal participation enables everyone to reach their full potential. Why is human rights education in the national school Curriculum important?  Positive impact on students and the school environment Children’s attitudes, ideas and characters are formed at a young age and these are heavily influenced by their environment, including their school education. Human rights education in school is an effective means to assist children to incorporate human rights values into their attitudes and behaviours.1 Assisting young people to incorporate these values into their daily lives is a concrete way to prevent bullying, discrimination and promote inclusion and 1 Frantzi, note 5, p 3. 12 respect for diversity. Human rights provide a valuable framework for good inter-personal relations and for making informed and proportionate decisions – from the playground to government and public policy, it starts with human rights education in schools. Research in Australian schools shows that where education around values is embedded in the content and pedagogy of the classroom, there is evidence of improved student engagement with schooling, better learning outcomes, and enhanced social and emotional wellbeing.1As a result of values education, schools have reported increased empathy, tolerance and respect, and increased student confidence to address bullying.2Schools have also reported a reduction in disciplinary measures, an increase in school attendance, and positive shifts in classroom and playground relationships as well as relationships at home.3 In the United Kingdom, UNICEF has been pioneering a program called the ‘Rights Respecting Schools Awards’ (Program).4 The Program awards schools that have incorporated the Convention on the Rights of the Child5into their planning, practice. This includes teaching and learning about the Convention, creating a rights-respecting culture and empowering children to become active citizens. In doing so, it has improved self-esteem, behaviour and relationships; reduced bullying and discrimination; increased discussion and engaged children in planning and reviewing their own learning. Moreover, it is has provided schools with a framework of common values. 1 Education Services Australia, Giving Voice to the Impacts of Values Education: The Final Report of the Values in Action Schools Project, October 2010. 2 Education Services Australia, Giving Voice to the Impacts of Values Education: The Final Report of the Values in Action Schools Project, October 2010; Department of Education, Science and Training, National Values Education Forum Report, April 2004; Australian Curriculum Studies Association, 2007 National Values Education Forum - Values Education in Practice: Making Connections, May 2007. See also research from primary schools in the United States of America, A Furco, Unpacking the Nature of Values Education in Primary School Settings (Speech delivered at the National Values in Education Forum in May 2007) as quoted in J McLeod and R Reynolds ‘Exposing Issues: Exploring Values. Education for human rights in the classroom’ in C Newell and B Offord Activating Human Rights in Education: Exploration, Innovation and Transformation (2008) p 41. 4 UNICEF United Kingdom, at http://www.unicef.org.uk/Education/Rights-Respecting-Schools-Award/ (viewed 13 May 2011). 5 International Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989, At http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm (viewed 13 May 2011). 13  Creating a human rights respecting culture The Commission believes that creating a society where all human rights are respected and promoted must start with human rights education in school. A ‘human rights respecting culture’ seeks to embed respect and responsibility for the realisation of rights through all levels of society. Human rights education is about fostering a rights respecting culture – where human rights become integrated in society at many levels, both personal and institutional. It is also about embedding an understanding of human rights and Australian values as a cornerstone of our social fabric and national ethos that informs all aspects of our nation as well as our attitudes and behaviours. The importance of creating a human rights respecting culture was strongly affirmed in the National Human Rights Consultation where “a considerable number of the submissions the Committee received referred to the need for greater human rights education for the development of a human rights culture in the community”.1In particular, participants identified the need to incorporate human rights into the national school Curriculum.2In response, Australia’s Human Rights Framework (the Framework) affirms the importance of fostering a rights respecting culture and recognises that “a human rights culture carries with it responsibilities – not just on government, the Parliament, courts and tribunals but on all members of the community – to recognise and respect the human rights of others”.3If all members of society feel ownership of rights then rights in general tend to be better protected.  Fulfilling a national and international commitments to human rights education Commonwealth of Australia, National Human Rights Consultation Report (2009). At 1 http://www.humanrightsconsultation.gov.au/www/nhrcc/RWPAttach.nsf/VAP/( 4CA02151F94FFB778ADAEC 2E6EA8653D)~NHRC+Report+(Prelims).pdf/$file/NHRC+Report+(Prelims).pdf (viewed 13 May 2011). 2 Allen Consulting Group, Summary Analysis of Options Identified During the Consultation, p 3. At http://www.humanrightsconsultation.gov.au/www/nhrcc/RWPAttach.nsf/VAP/(4CA02151F94FFB778ADAEC 2E6EA8653D)~NHRC+Report+(Appendix+D).pdf/$file/NHRC+Report+(Appendix+D).pdf (viewed 13 May 2011) 3 Commonwealth of Australia, Australia’s Human Rights Framework, 21 April 2010, p 4. At http://www.ag.gov.au/humanrightsframework (viewed 13 May 2011). 14 The delivery of human rights education in schools also fulfils Australia’s international and domestic human rights commitments. At the international level these commitments are detailed in Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 29 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and Article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. At the national level the Framework affirms the government’s commitment to deliver human rights education in primary and secondary schools – “developing an understanding of rights and responsibilities, including human rights, will be an integral part of curriculum development”.1 The integration of human rights education in the Curriculum is identified in the Framework as a critical opportunity through which this commitment can be achieved. The Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians reflects the importance of human rights education. Goal 1 of the Declaration commits to promoting equity through schooling. It recognises the importance of ensuring a school environment free from discrimination and the central importance of schooling in contributing towards a socially cohesive society that respect and appreciates cultural, social and religious diversity.2Goal 2 of the Declaration commits to ensuring all young Australians become active and informed citizens who act with moral and ethical integrity, appreciate diversity, are committed to national values of democracy, equity and justice, participate in Australia’s civic life and are responsible global and local citizens.3 1 Attorney-General’s Department, note 15, p.5. 2 Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs, Melbourne Declaration on Education Goals for Young Australians, December 2008 p 7. At http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Declaration_on_the_Educational_Goals_for_Young_ Australians.pdf (viewed 13 May 2011). 3 Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs, above, p 9. 15 Furthermore, the bi-partisan support for human rights education in Australia, reflected in statements by the Opposition leader, Mr Tony Abbott,1 and Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training, Mr Christopher Pyne,2strengthens the case for the integration of human rights education in the national school Curriculum. 3 The development of the human rights framework The history of human rights has been shaped by all major world events and by the struggle for dignity, freedom and equality everywhere. Yet it was only with the establishment of the United Nations that human rights finally achieved formal, universal recognition. The turmoil and atrocities of the Second World War and the growing struggle of colonial nations for independence prompted the countries of the world to create a forum to deal with some of the war’s consequences and, in particular, to prevent the recurrence of such appalling events. This forum was the United Nations. When the United Nations was founded in 1945, it reaffirmed the faith in human rights of all the peoples taking part. Human rights were cited in the founding Charter as central to their concerns and have remained so ever since. One of the first major achievements of the newly formed United Nations was the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR),1 adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1948. This powerful instrument continues to exert an enormous impact on people’s lives all over the Abott, T. ‘Message to the University of Western Sydney for the International Human Rights Education 1 Conference’, November 2010. Pyne, C, What government should do to advance a human rights culture, speech delivered at the University of 2 Western Sydney International Human Rights Education Conference, 5 November 2010. United Nations 3 No 4 Decade for Human Rights Education (1995-2004) Practical activities for primary and secondary schools TEACHING HUMAN RIGHTS 16 world. It was the first time in history that a document considered to have universal value was adopted by an international organization. It was also the first time that human rights and fundamental freedoms were set forth in such detail. There was broad-based international support for the Declaration when it was adopted. Although the fifty-eight Member States that constituted the United Nations at that time varied in terms of their ideology, political system, religious and cultural background, and patterns of socio-economic development, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights represented a common statement of shared goals and aspirations – a vision of the world as the international community would like it to be. The Declaration recognizes that the “inherent dignity" of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world” and is linked to the recognition of the fundamental rights to which every human being aspires, namely the right to life, liberty and security of person; the right to an adequate standard of living; the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution; the right to own property; the right to freedom of opinion and expression; the right to education; the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; and the right to freedom from torture and degrading treatment, among others. These are inherent rights to be enjoyed by all inhabitants of the global village (women, men, children and all groups in society, whether disadvantaged or not) and not “gifts” to be withdrawn, withheld or granted at someone’s whim or will. Eleanor Roosevelt, who chaired the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in its early years, emphasized both the universality of these rights1 : 1 Eleanor Roosevelt, “In Our Hands” (1958 speech delivered on the tenth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights). 17 "Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home – so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighbourhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerned citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world." On the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1998, Mary Robinson, High Commissioner for Human Rights, called it “one of the great aspirational documents of our human history”. It has served as the model for many national constitutions and has truly become the most universal of all instruments, having been translated into more languages than any other. The Declaration has inspired a large number of subsequent human rights instruments, which together constitute the international law of human rights.4 These instruments include the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), treaties that are legally binding on the States that are parties to them. The Universal Declaration and the two Covenants constitute the International Bill of Rights. Modern technology presents great utility and promise, including for human rights. The development of the Internet has widened access to knowledge, while new media platforms have given activists fast ways to organise communities and share messages at scale. Emerging technologies, such 18 as artificial intelligence, may significantly expand the availability and quality of data that informs policy and healthcare decisions for the benefit of society. Their proponents argue that these technologies will create new opportunities, increase efficiency, and help maximise human potential. At the same time, rapid developments in artificial intelligence, automation, and robotics raise questions about their impacts on human rights and the future of work. The use of machines to increase productivity risks resulting in heightened social inequality through downward pressure on wages and the loss of jobs. The growth of the “gig economy,” facilitated by new technologies, has contributed to changing the nature of work by increasing the availability of flexible positions that provide opportunities for some while negatively affecting the livelihoods of others. And in the background, mass data collection can lead to violations of the right to privacy and inhibit free and fair societies. The extent of these impacts remains unknown. Human rights organisations are exploring how to ensure that advances in technology benefit all people and do not exacerbate inequality for marginalised populations. we look specifically at concerns arising in connection with the collection and use of learners’datathrough theuse of EdTech.3Such issues include the lack of choice regarding the use of EdTech (when mandated by schools or governments); insufficient, and a lack of age-appropriate, information regarding the terms of such use; the surveillance and collection of significant amounts of data from learners (extending to their physical locations, personal details, product and program usage, academic performance, among other information); and the storage, use or sale of such data for purposes unrelated to education, particularly as led by financial motives or political interests. Also considered is the lack of any, or appropriately updated, 19 government assessment, oversight or regulation related to a rapidly developing sector, as well as the challenges associated with ensuring accountability or access to justice in connection with EdTech-related harms. 1 State obligations under the human rights framework must be the starting point for assessing and responding to such concerns. Part Ioutlines the international and regional human rights legal framework that governs the relationship between technology and education, providing a starting point and useful guidance for anyone seeking to understand the impacts, particularly on children, of existing and emerging EdTech products and services. Part IIthen provides a comparative analysis of the regulation of EdTech in ten countries, through an examination of current data protection, education and related legislation, for the purpose of understanding how different countries are paying 2 attention to and addressing key human rights issues in practice. Human rights are more critical than ever in the digital age. They let people express themselves online, share opinions, create, use, and access technology in a safe and just manner. Technology can be used as an avenue to exercise freedom of expression, hold governments to account and expose wrongdoing. 1 NESCO, Supporting learning recovery one year into COVID-19: the Global Education Coalition in action(2021), p.7 2 Technology in education and EdTech are hereby used interchangeably. For the purposes of this paper, technology in education means ‘any technology —including hardware, software and digital content—designed or appropriated for (any) educational purpose’ aswell as ‘any companies that produce products for the educational sector —hardware (equipment) and software (applications, programs and systems). (Hennessy, S., Jordan, K., Wagner, D. and Ed Tech HubTeam. 2021. Problem analysis and focus of EdTech Hub’s Work: technology in education in low-and middle-income countries. EdTech Hub. (Working Paper 7.), p.8; and Fernanda Campagnucci, Following the pandemic: The dilemma around digital rights in education. In Campanha Latinoamericana por el Derecho a la Education (CLADE), Human right to education: horizons and meanings in the post pandemic, p. 2-32) 20 However, technology can also pose a systemic threat to human rights by reproducing structural discrimination against marginalized groups in policing, migration, social welfare, and access to health care. Surveillance tools also adversely affect already marginalized groups in many ways across the world. Our mission is to respond to emerging threats facing human rights in the digital era and help shape and protect rights for the future. We hold Big Tech to account, while confronting the digital and automated state, and fighting against the increasing government surveillance and censorship enabled by these technologies. The digital and automated state refers to how governments are increasingly using technology to make vital decisions in contexts of welfare, migration and asylum management systems. We envision a future where technology enables the protection of human rights and an equitable society. In the digital age, human rights enable just participation in digital environments in a safe, accountable, and inclusive manner, guaranteeing freedom of expression, privacy, equality, anti-discrimination and data protection. We increasingly conduct our lives online and our rights must be protected. 1 How technology impacts society ? As technological developments continue at an exponential pace, and with technology companies expanding in power and global reach, it is more 1 https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we- do/technology/#:~:text=In%20the%20digital%20age%2C%20human,anti%2Ddiscrimination%20and%20data% 20protection. 21 important than ever to critically examine who is best served, and who is harmed, through these developments.  Governments are using algorithms to provide public services in an absence of adequate accountability measures to make sure it’s done fairly.  Despite the promise of technical neutrality, Artificial Intelligence is worsening inequality and discrimination in societies around the world.  Biased technologies are being deployed to purportedly “solve” complex issues in contexts of migration, social welfare, access to education, and health care.  Big Tech corporations are facilitating the spread of mis- and disinformation – with catastrophic consequences for societies around the world.  During the Covid-19 pandemic, we witnessed the Big Tech-enabled proliferation of conspiracy theories via social media, further risking the lives of millions of people.  Social media algorithms are enabling hate, incitement to violence, online harassment and censorship of some vulnerable groups to spread.  Spyware and other forms of targeted surveillance is not only impacting on the rights of individuals to privacy, but is also creating a chilling effect that can scare off people from joining social movements or speaking out about their rights. Big Tech Accountability Big technology companies wield tremendous power over our lives. Our increasing reliance on Big Tech has allowed a handful of companies to undermine our privacy and track our every move, reshaping our interactions and creating predictions about our behaviour for their economic gain. 22 Their surveillance-based business model poses a systemic threat to human rights, including children’s rights. We have little control over what information corporations and governments gather about us, how they use that information, and with whom they share it. With the growing scourge of misinformation, proliferation of hate and racism online, big technology companies must do more to respect human rights. This is why we campaign for regulatory measures to force big tech firms to abide by their human rights responsibilities. Algorithms are a process, set of rules, or instructions that enable a computer programme to put together different sources of information and generate results. Algorithms are also used to power social media platforms determining what content users get to see. They are everywhere in different spheres of our lives. For example, they are being used in managing welfare systems, policing and criminal justice systems. Surveillance and Privacy Across the world, we are also seeing the misuse of advanced technologies to spy on, harass and intimidate human rights defenders (HRDs), including youth activists, and dampen social movements. Beyond examining problematic technologies, themselves, we must challenge the social, economic, and political conditions that allow or encourage the misuse of technology by powerful actors, and their impact on specific populations, such as women, racial, ethnic and religious minorities, children, LGBTQIA+ people, and those affected by poverty and inequality. Technology must facilitate access to information and not censor it as witnessed in the United States where tech companies have been accused of facilitating online censorship of reproductive rights content. Access to critical information on reproductive health and rights including medical abortion is everyone’s right. 23 Types of Surveillance :  Facial recognition is a way of identifying or confirming an individual’s identity using their facial features via image or video.  Biometric Surveillance is the use of human characteristics to identify individuals. Common forms of biometrics are fingerprints scanners and face identification.  AI-powered surveillance is the use of artificial intelligence and surveillance technology to monitor, track, analyse and identify people, places and objects. AI-powered surveillance AI-powered surveillance can be deployed by governments and corporate entities for various reasons some of which may have implications on human rights such as public monitoring. There is therefore an urgency in providing detailed recommendations and guidance for the use of such technologies. Our investigations also provide further detailed evidence to support the need to ban the use of technologies when they are inconsistent with human rights. We will continue to track, investigate, and advocate for stronger protections in the design and use of new and frontier technologies including artificial intelligence/machine learning (ML), biometric systems including facial recognition technology and emerging “smart cities” or digital urban infrastructures. State automation and Artificial Intelligence Today Artificial Intelligence (AI) is defining a new era of technology in the same way that the internet was the defining era of the past. AI is being incorporated into nearly every single aspect of our daily lives, shaping and 24 mediating everything from manufacturing and financial services to healthcare and the economy. How are states using automation and algorithmic systems? Governments are increasingly using algorithms in decision making processes. For example, in contexts of health care delivery, social welfare, policing, and migration. This poses a variety of risks and potential harmful impacts on human rights, including for the right to equality and non-discrimination, as well as a range of other economic and social rights such as the right to education and health. Transparency and accountability measures are required to safeguard human rights and mitigate against the potential harms that might be caused by this technology. What is algorithmic bias? Algorithmic bias occurs when algorithms make decisions that systematically disadvantage certain groups of people. It can result in for example predicting the likelihood a crime being committed by a particular person or in a particular place. These people or the identified places are put under the gaze of the police which could result in discrimination of targeted people. Future technology trends Emerging technologies will continue to transform our societies. Governments are increasingly adopting the use of Artificial Intelligence tools in decision making processes in the public sector. This will affect people’s lives and rights. 25 We at Amnesty are focused on identifying the potential human rights implications of emerging technologies like Generative AI, and then engaging with both governments and companies to ensure that these technologies are developed and deployed in a rights-respecting manner. New technologies should be developed and deployed with robust accountability guardrails and policy frameworks to protect human rights everywhere in the world. Technology must serve humanity’s best interests and not just the interests of the few rich and powerful owners of companies developing these technologies. Governments have the responsibility to ensure businesses act responsibly when investing in technology. Top 10 Human Rights Risks: for the Information and Communications Technology Sector 1 Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Big Data Analytics: The related developments of AI and big data analytics have been enabled by more powerful computing and the ability to utilize large and complex data sets. These developments present tremendous opportunities, such as in medical diagnostics, retail, and law enforcement. However, a variety of new risks emerge with their use, such as automated systems making discriminatory decisions (such as in housing, credit, employment, and health),2 the automation of jobs impacting labor rights by reducing demand for certain skills,3 or the misuse of personal data. 26 2 Internet of Things: The networking of objects, devices, people, and organizations to create the so-called “internet of things” is enabling a wide range of new products, services, and solutions, such as smart cities, sustainable agriculture, self-driving cars, connected healthcare, and more efficient industrial processes. These opportunities are accompanied by new risks and challenges, such as the difficulty of obtaining informed consent from citizens for data use, or the need to establish privacy protocols for who has access to data, who controls data, and how data is used. These challenges form an important new social license to operate—without public trust, the internet of things is much less likely to become a commercial success. 3 Encryption: Strong encryption (i.e. authentication of digital interactions) is increasingly accessible for everyday communications, such as email, voice, messaging, and cloud storage. Encryption provides the privacy and security necessary to exercise the right to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age and is especially important for human rights defenders, vulnerable populations, and whistleblowers.4 However, law enforcement and intelligence services are concerned that encryption makes fighting crime (e.g. drugs, terrorism, and fraud) tougher, and they are using public policies or hacking techniques to prohibit and fight it. Some states are implementing or proposing “back doors” to get around encryption—but providing “special access” to government authorities can weaken everyone’s online security and privacy. 4 Hate Speech and Countering Violent Extremism: As set out everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression, including the right to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. However, governments are 27 increasingly interested in proactive monitoring, surveilling, removing, and blocking of certain types of content, especially terrorist content and hate speech. These content restrictions are important for human rights protection but must be “necessary and proportionate” and the least intrusive restrictions to achieve the desired result. Access to appeal and remedy in the event of over-blocking is crucial. 5 Law Enforcement Relationships: ICT companies have relationships with law enforcement agencies, from, for example, responding to demands for user data and content restrictions or the sale of products, services, and technologies. However, companies face the risk that law enforcement agencies themselves violate human rights, such as when surveillance powers are misused, overbroad requests for data or content restrictions are made, or governments make use of hacking techniques without proper approvals.6 Transparency about company relationships with law enforcement agencies (including sales relationships) is increasingly important. 6 Child Rights: As children spend more time online, it is important for companies to understand how to respect children’s rights in the digital world. This extends beyond protecting children from harmful content to include how to empower children as active digital rights holders.7 A comprehensive approach to child rights will incorporate children’s rights to privacy, freedom of expression, information, education, and non-discrimination and consider how to engage with children as rights holders. It will address important dilemmas, such as the role of parents, quality of available content, and need to balance child protection with important opportunities for development, discovery, learning, and expression. 28 7 Customer Due Diligence: ICT companies can be “directly linked” to human rights impacts via the use of products, services, and technologies by their customers. While leverage to prevent negative human rights impacts during the product use phase is limited, it is important for ICT companies selling to businesses and governments to undertake customer due diligence on human rights issues, especially for public sector clients involved in law enforcement, justice, public safety, and counter terrorism activities in high risk markets. Many governments are increasingly integrating human rights factors into export controls of technologies with dual use capabilities under the Wassenaar Arrangement. 8 Non-Discrimination: The underrepresentation of minorities in the ICT industry is of great concern to the whole sector. Discrimination in hiring, promotion, pay, and workplace cultural practices needs to be addressed, and solutions need to be implemented for more equal representation in the workplace. Examples of actions companies can take include robust grievance mechanisms, equal pay assessments, unconscious bias training, investment in diversifying the workforce pipeline, performance transparency, and creation of a culture of inclusion. Companies also need to be alert to different forms of discrimination—such as gender, political opinion or sexual orientation—in different countries and cultural contexts. 9 Raw Materials Sourcing: Technology hardware relies on the sourcing of a wide range of minerals. While significant attention is paid to the “conflict minerals” of tin, tantalum, tungsten, and gold sourced from the Democratic Republic of Congo and surrounding countries, this risk is much broader. It covers other minerals (such as cobalt and copper), other locations (such as Indonesia, Ghana, and 29 China), and a wide range of human rights issues (such as child labor, health and safety, and working hours) in addition to these specific issues of conflict. The ICT industry should focus on approaches most likely to address the root causes of these problems. 10 Forced and Bonded Labor: In recent years, it has become clear that the manufacture and distribution of technology hardware can involve forms of bonded and forced labor—for example, where fees are charged to workers during their recruitment or where passports and other forms of identification are withheld. In these cases it is important that recruitment fees are repaid in full to the employee and the companies end relationships with violating employment agencies if they do not demonstrate improvement. Top 3 Opportunities for Positive Impact 1Human Rights by Design: A variety of disruptive products, services, and technologies (such as AI, big data analytics, and blockchain) are shaping our future. On the one hand, we have a once-in-a-generation chance to harness massive advances in technology for the public good; on the other hand, we risk unleashing into the world new technologies, capabilities, and business models that might cause significant harm. A “human rights by design” approach would build on existing “privacy by design” methodologies to ensure that other human rights issues—such as 30 freedom of expression, non-discrimination, and child rights—are built in from the start. 2 Access to Products and Services: ICT can substantially increase the access that rights holders have to a wide range of resources—such as information, healthcare, education, and financial services—that are essential to the realization of human rights. ICT can be deployed to increase public sector accountability and transparency, such as improving the fairness of elections and the responsiveness of the justice system. ICT can also unlock significant social, economic, cultural, and civil rights opportunities for women. 3 Human Rights Solutions: Collectively, the human rights community makes significant efforts to address widespread and intractable human rights violations, such as human trafficking, child exploitation, and conflict minerals. Innovative ICT technologies (such as PhotoDNA, blockchain, and big data analytics) can be deployed by governments, companies, and human rights organizations to address these challenges in new ways. ICT companies can also provide specialist advice and solutions to human rights defenders, such as in the areas of data security and privacy. The international and regional human rights legal framework as it 1 relates to the relationship between children, technology and education: This part outlines the application of the international and regional human rights legal framework to EdTech. It begins with a brief introduction to the human rights framework, including with reference to State obligations, corporate activities, key principles related to children’s human rights, followed by discussion of the human rights of most relevance to this topic, namely the 1 https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000386092.locale=es 31 right to education and right to privacy. It then provides an overview of more specific guidance, released by UN treaty bodies and UN experts in recent years, in relation to children, technology and education. The human rights framework States’ human rights obligations The human rights framework sets out the long-standing, global recognition of the basic rights and freedoms enjoyed by every person in the world, throughout their lives. All human rights are universal, inalienable, indivisible,and interdependent. They encompass civil, cultural, economic, political,and social rights, to be enjoyed without discrimination, and areinherentto all people, regardless of nationality, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or anyother status.Under international law, states have obligations and duties to respect, protect and fulfil human rights, so that they: refrain from interfering with or curtailing the enjoyment of human rights; protect individuals and groups against human rights abuses by third parties; and take positive action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic human rights in practice. Where human rights violations or abuses by non-state actors occur, governments have an obligation to ensure effective remedies are available. Such remedies, including as experienced by children in relation to EdTech contexts, must be widely known; readily available; ensure prompt, thorough and impartial investigation of alleged abuses; and be capable of ending ongoing harm.  Human rights and corporate activities: The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) represent the authoritative global standard for preventing and addressing human rights harms connected to business activity, setting out the distinct but complementary role of states and companies in preventing and 32 addressing business-related human rights harms.7The UNGPs are comprised of three separate but mutually reinforcing pillars, namely: the State duty toprotectagainst human rights abuses by third parties, including businesses, through appropriate policies, regulation and adjudication (Pillar I); the corporate responsibility to respecthuman rights, by not infringing on the rights of others, and to address adverse impacts on human rights related to their activities (Pillar II); and access to remedyfor victims of corporate-related human rights abuse through judicial or non-judicial mechanisms (Pillar III).In order tomeet their responsibility to respect human rights, companies should have in place policies and processes including a human rights due diligence process to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address their impacts on human rights, and processes to remedy rights abuses which they caused or to which they contributed.8[UNGP principles 15, 22]Further, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has emphasised that while voluntary actions of corporate responsibility by companies can advance children’s rights, these ‘are not a substitute for State action and regulation of businesses in line with obligations under the Convention and its protocols or for businesses to comply 1 with their responsibilities to respect children’s rights. International human rights framework relating to technology and 2 education Across different contexts, the specific human rights impacted by EdTech will vary. However, there are certain human rights which are likely to be particularly relevant as ones vulnerable to violation or abuse, and also important as a lens through which to assess laws, policies or practices. These include: the right to education; the right to privacy; the right to freedom of thought, 1 CRC, General Comment No. 5 on General measures of implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, UN Doc. CRC/GC/2003/5 (27 November 2003), para. 12; CRC, General comment No. 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration, UN Doc. CRC/C/GC/14 (29 May 2013); CRC, General Comment No. 16 on State obligations regarding the impact of the business sector on children’s rights, UN Doc. CRC/C/GC/16 (17 April 2013), paras. 13-23. 2 CRC, General Comment No. 16 on State obligations regarding the impact of the business sector on children’s rights, UN Doc. CRC/C/GC/16 (17 April 2013), para. 9. 33 conscience and religion; the right to freedom of opinion and expression, including the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers;10the right to freedom of association and peaceful assembly; the right to health (particularly regarding access to information and support related to health and well-being); and the right to culture, leisure and play.Further, all human rights legal provisions must be read in conjunction with the principles of non-discrimination and equality. 1_The right to education: Of obvious relevance to EdTech, theright to education has been widely recognised by governments around the world through a number of international instruments, including theUniversal Declaration on Human Rights,11International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,12(1966, CESCR),theConvention on the Rights of the Child,13the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,14and the UNESCO Convention against Discrimination in Education, as well as through specific provisions in other treaties covering specific groups (for example, women and girls,15persons with disabilities,16migrants,17refugees18and Indigenous peoples19) and contexts (for example, education during armed conflicts20). It has also been incorporated into variousregional treatiesand enshrined as a right in the vast majority of national constitutions.21The UNCommittee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rightshas provided guidance on State obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, stating that education in all its forms and at all levels shall exhibit these interrelated and essential features: availability(i.e. education is free and there is adequate infrastructure and trained teachers able to support the delivery of education); 34 accessibility(i.e. the education system is non-discriminatory and accessible to all, and positive steps are taken to include the most marginalised); acceptability(i.e. the content of education is relevant, non- discriminatory and culturally appropriate, and of quality; schools are safe and teachers are professional); adaptability(education evolves with the changing needs of society and challenges inequalities, such as gender discrimination; education adapts to suit locally specific needs and contexts). Regarding the purpose of education, the human rights framework guides that education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and that education shall enable all persons to participate effectively in a free society, promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations and all racial, ethnic or religious groups. The CRC further outlines that: States parties agree that the education of the child shall be directed 1 to: (a)The development of the child's personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to theirfullest potential; (b) The development of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and for the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations; (c) The development of respect for the child's parents, his or her own cultural identity, language and values, for the national values of the country in which the child is living, the country from which he or she may originate, and for civilizations different from his or her own; 1 Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus, Denmark, 25 June 1998); Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean (Escazú, Costa Rica, 4 March 2018) 35 (d) The preparation of the child for responsible life in a free society, in the spirit of understanding, peace, tolerance, equality of sexes, and friendship among all peoples, ethnic, national and religious groups and persons of indigenous origin; (e) The development of respect for the natural environment.State responsibility for the resourcing of education is also covered in the international human rights framework, which makes clear that primary education shall be compulsory and available free to all, and secondary and higher education shall be both supported in particular by the progressive introduction of free education. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has provided guidance to states as to what progressive realisation of rights means in practice, regarding the use of maximum available resources(referring to both the resources existing within a State as well as those available from the international community through international cooperation and assistance), the immediate obligation to guarantee rights without discrimination of any kind, the obligation to take timely steps which re deliberate, concrete and targeted, and the requirement for states to take into account the precarious situation of disadvantaged and marginalised individuals and prioritise grave situations or situations of risk.26The right to education has been recognised as a ‘gateway’ or foundational right to the enjoyment of many other human rights across a person’s life, such as related to work and livelihood opportunities, political participation and engagement in communities and societies more broadly, the enjoyment of gender and other forms of equality,27and as increasingly important to people’s abilities to address escalating climate and ecological crises, in supporting environmental literacy and engagement. 2_The right to privacy The international human rights framework does not recognise personal data protection as a fundamental right. However, the right to 36 privacy –generally framed as protection of the law from arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy, family, home or correspondence, and from unlawful attacks on honour and reputation –is recognised and protected a human right through a series of international legal instruments, notably the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,29and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.30A specific right to privacy for children is enshrined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child.31The right to privacy is also reiterated in regional contexts, often with more specificity than many of the international agreements which were drafted prior to the development and widespread use of the internet and other relevant developments. 2.3.Specific guidance by UN treaty bodies and experts relevant to children, education,and technologyAdditional authoritative guidance on the applicability of the international and regional human rights framework to specific geographical and thematic contexts, as well as to ongoing technological developments, can be found in a variety of sources. These include the concluding observations, general comments/recommendations, statements and views of UN human rights treaty bodies (i.e. the bodies of independent experts tasked with monitoring implementation by State parties of specific treaties) and the reports issued by UN special procedure mandate holders (i.e. the independent human rights experts –rapporteurs, independent experts or working groups –appointed by the Human Rights Council to report and advise on human rights from a thematic or country-specific perspective). National human rights institutions, case law, academic commentary provide other sources of the interpretation of human rights in practice.Set out below are key points from guidance of particular relevance to EdTech, as released in recent years, in relationto children’s right to privacy and to the digitalisation of education. 2.3.1.Children’srighttoprivacyIn January 2011, the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy released a report addressing two separate 37 challenges; artificial intelligence and privacy, and children’s privacy.33In relation to data and artificial intelligence generally, he highlighted the necessity of a privacy analysis given that:...most data are held by private corporations that leverage their commercial value, combining diverse datasets to maximize their analytical capacity. A response is required to growing public concern about the intrusiveness and potential impact of data gathering, the risk of surveillance and the increasing use of algorithms using such data sets to automate decisions that affect individuals’ lives.34In considering principles and recommendations on the right to privacy of children, the Special Rapporteur affirmed that the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which guarantees a right to privacy for children, must be interpreted broadly to fully accommodate their privacy experiences.35Regarding education and schooling in particular, the report reiterated the purpose of education as set out in the human rights framework and noted the large role played by schoolsin how children experience privacy on a day-to-day basis. With the COVID-19 pandemic – which saw approximately 90 per cent of the global school population affected by school closures in 193 countries by 1 April 202036–education shifted online rapidly and to a significant 33UNGA, Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy’sreport on ‘Artificial intelligence and privacy, and children’s privacy’ 2.3.Specific guidance by UN treaty bodies and experts relevant to children, education, and technology: Additional authoritative guidance on the applicability of the international and regional human rights framework to specific geographical and thematic contexts, as well as to ongoing technological developments, can be found in a variety of sources. These include the concluding observations, general comments/recommendations, statements and views of UN human rights treaty bodies (i.e. the bodies of independent experts tasked with monitoring 38 implementation by State parties of specific treaties) and the reports issued by UN special procedure mandate holders (i.e. the independent human rights experts –rapporteurs, independent experts or working groups –appointed by the Human Rights Council to report and advise on human rights from a thematic or country-specific perspective). National human rights institutions, case law, academic commentary provide other sources of the interpretation of human rights in practice. Set out below are key points from guidance of particular relevance to EdTech, as released in recent years, in relation to children’s right to privacy and to the digitalisation of education. 1.Children’s right to privacy In January 2011, the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy released a report addressing two separate challenges; artificial intelligence and privacy, and children’s privacy.33In relation to data and artificial intelligence generally, he highlighted the necessity of a privacy analysis given that: “most data are held by private corporations that leverage their commercial value, combining diverse datasets to maximize their analytical capacity. A response is required to growing public concern about the intrusiveness and potential impact of data gathering, the risk of surveillance and the increasing use of algorithms using such data sets to automate decisions that affect individuals’ lives.” In considering principles and recommendations on the right to privacy of children, the Special Rapporteur affirmed that the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which guarantees a right to privacy for children, must be interpreted broadly to fully accommodate their privacy experiences.35Regarding education and schooling in particular, the report reiterated the purpose of education as set out in the human rights framework and noted the large role played by schoolsin how children experience privacy on a day-to-day basis. With the 39 COVID-19 pandemic –which saw approximately 90 per cent of the global school population affected by school closures in 193 countries by 1 April 202036–education shifted online rapidly and to a significant degree, with downloads of education applications increasing 90 per cent compared to the weekly average in late 2019.37Among other impacts noted by the Special Rapporteur, the shift to online education amplified existing power imbalancesbetween EdTech companies and children, and between governments and children and parents. The report reflected information received that indicated, variously, a lack of protection for children’s right to privacy in national legal frameworks or a waiving ofsuch protection, no capacity on the part of children or their parents to challenge EdTech company privacy arrangements or refuse to provide data, and that the selection of EdTech by schools was driven by curriculum and financial considerations rather thanprivacy concerns. he report noted that EdTech companies ‘routinely control children’s digital educational records’and that schools themselves ‘hold significant amounts of children’s information and increasingly track children by monitoring students’ online activities and surveillance cameras’, with such data extending to thinking characteristics, learning trajectory, engagement score, response times, pages read, videos viewed, device identification, location data, and being shared with third parties such as advertising partners.39The Special Rapporteur noted that use of EdTech requires accountability, meaningful consent, purpose limitation, data minimisation, transparency and security safeguards, and that educational processes need not and should not undermine the enjoyment of privacy and other rights, wherever or however education occurs, nor intensify existing inequalities. In light of these findings, the report set out specific conclusions and recommendations to states. These included direction to states to incorporate children’s views, children’s strategies for privacy, findings of child-focused 40 research and/or child privacy impact assessments in public policy settings; develop comprehensive online educational plans of action based on Article 29(1) of the CRC and the Council of Europe guidelines on children’s data protection in an education setting41; ensure that appropriate legal frameworks are established and maintained for online education; create public infrastructure for non-commercial educational and social spaces; ensure that information is available to children on exercising their rights on, for example, the websites of data protection authorities, and ensure the provision of counselling, complaint mechanisms and remedies specifically for children, including for cyberbullying; and implement the UNGPs and its associated gender guidance. 2.The digitalization of education In March 2021, the Committee on the Rights of the Child released its general comment no. 25 on children’s rightsin relation to the digital economy. The aim of the guidance was to explain how States parties should implement the onvention in relation to the digital environment and adopt approaches to relevant legislative, policy and other measures to ensure full compliance with their obligations, in the light of the opportunities, risks and challenges in promoting, respecting, protecting and fulfilling all children’s rights in the digital environment.43The CRC noted that innovations in digital technologies affect children’s lives and their rights in ways that are wide-ranging and interdependent, even where children do not themselves access the internet,44and affirmed that the rights of every child must be respected, protected and fulfilled in the digital environmentusing the following four principles as a guide for determining the measures to guarantee such rights: non-discrimination; best interests of the child; right to life, survival and development; respect for the views of the child. Regarding the best interests of the child, the Committee advised that States parties should ensure that this is a primary consideration in all actions 41 regarding the provision, regulation, design, management and use of the digital environment, and that this should involve regard for all children’s rights, including their rights to seek, receive and impart information, to be protected from harm and to have their views given due weight, with transparency in the assessment of the best interests of the child and the criteria that have been applied. With respect to the right to life, survival and development: “States parties should pay specific attention to the effects of technology in the earliest years of life, when brain plasticity is maximal and the social environment, in particular relationships with parents and caregivers, is crucial to shaping children’s cognitive, emotional and social development. In the early years, precautions may be required, depending on the design, purpose and uses of technologies. Training and advice on the appropriate use of digital devices should be given to parents, caregivers, educators and other relevant actors, taking into account the research on the effects of digital technologies on children’s development, especially during the critical neurological growth spurts of early childhood and adolescence.” Considering the implementation of children’s rights in practice, the Committee stated that the realisation of children’s rights and their protection in the digital environment will require a broad range oflegislative, administrative,and other measures, including precautionary ones.48With regard to the legislative environment, it stated that: “States parties should review, adopt and update national legislation in line with international human rights standards, to ensure that the digital environment is compatible with the rights set out in the Convention and the Optional Protocols thereto. Legislation should remain relevant, in the context of technological advances and emerging practices. They should mandatethe use of child rights impact assessments to embed children’s rights into legislation, 42 budgetary allocations and other administrative decisions relating to the digital environment and promote their use among public bodies and businesses relating to the digital environment.” 1 Human Rights and Technology: The harms behind? On 25th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the Society for Computers and Law was established. Human rights and human rights law over the following 25 years has often taken second place to ethics in the debates about regulation of technology. Now however, there is a growing recognition that regulation of artificial intelligence and other forms of technologies should be firmly rooted in the existing human rights framework and neither undermine nor replace existing human rights standards. Human rights conventions, as living breathing instruments were crafted to grow and respond to the developments of societies and their new challenges. This article looks at why the human rights framework is well suited to the governance of risks to humans from technology and artificial intelligence. I will draw on three specific examples to illustrate how harms have been assessed by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and conclude with a roundup of some principles to be applied to human rights risk assessment. Why human rights and why now? Technology crosses international geographical boundaries and requires regulating in a way that can be understood and applied across those boundaries. Existing international and European human rights standards were internationally 1 https://www.scl.org/13067-human-rights-and-technology-the-harms-behind-the-hype/ 43 agreed in the 1940s and 50s. They consist of a well-established framework that is enforceable, there is a wealth of existing jurisprudence and the underlying principles conveniently map on to the lifecycle of a product. Figure: the human rights framework of prevention, monitoring and oversight and effective remedies, mapped to the lifecycle of a product as described by McGregor, L. Murray. The human rights framework has a tried and tested ability to enable a fair balance to be struck between competing interests – for example the right to privacy versus freedom of expression, innovation versus individual rights. Under the international systems, the State is the primary duty bearer with the obligation to prevent harm and protect human rights. In this sense, a failure to appropriately regulate could result in the state breaching the operational duty to protect where it is known or ought to be known that human 1 rights are at risk. In business and corporate arenas, the UN Guiding principles on Business and Human Rights introduced a corporate responsibility both to respect human rights by not infringing on the rights of others and to address adverse impacts on human rights related to their activities. In the UK itself, human rights are protected by domestic law which is now interpreted and developed in accordance with international human rights law and the Human Rights Act 1998 which gave effect to the ECHR. Notwithstanding recent attacks on the HRA 1998 and the Strasbourg court, the UK’s underlying constitutional and common law adherence to human rights standards predates the adoption of the HRA 1998 by centuries. Why now? The UN have consistently called for human rights to be front and centre of technology regulation. This requires listening to affected communities, assessing the human rights risk before, during and after their use, implementing a robust legal framework and resisting the temptation for self regulation by industry as this has been shown to be ineffective. The ‘Summit of the Future’ in 44 2024 will discuss the need to create a Global Digital Compact for an open, free and secure digital future for all. The Council of Europe is working on the Draft Framework Convention on AI, Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law. The Convention, if adopted, will impose general obligations to respect human rights and freedoms, maintain integrity of democratic processes and respect for the rule of law. It takes a risk based approach in line with the EU AI Act and requires risk assessment and risk management to mitigate human rights risks. At the time of writing, political agreement has been reached in respect of the EU AI Act which will require those who deploy high-risk AI systems to conduct fundamental rights impact assessments and notify relevant national authorities in Europe of the result. Although no longer applicable in the UK companies that operate in Europe will be required to adhere to this. In the UK itself, there are multiple new duties of care and duties to conduct risk assessments contained in the Online Safety Act 2023 and the data protection legislation (both existing and forthcoming). Companies are also required to comply with the Age-Appropriate Design Code where online services are likely to be accessed by children. Regulation raises complex questions relating to who has rights and who is responsible for harm. One significant issue is whether, and to what extent, individuals have a right to know that technology is being used at all in decisions affecting human rights including what that technology is and how that technology works. Often commercial sensitivity is cited as a reason for refusing to disclose this information. Further, an obvious current loophole in automated decision making is that where a human is ‘in the loop’ many of the current existing legal protections are removed. Finally, where human rights should be litigated may also raise complex issues given the transnational nature of technology. Jurisdiction 45 Article of the European Convention on Human Rights provides ‘the High Contracting Parties shall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in Section I of this Convention’. The obvious first question when seeking to establish and enforce rights, given that technology does not always respect geographical boundaries is – who is ‘within the jurisdiction’? As an exception to the principle of territoriality, the ECHR has recognised that acts of states parties performed or producing effects outside their territories can constitute an exercise of jurisdiction within the meaning of article 1 (see e.g. H. F. and ors v France)2. Helpfully the ECtHR has very recently considered this in the context of electronic communications in Wieder and Guarnieri v The United Kingdom3 (although only at first instance, this case is likely to be of significant wider importance as it is the first case in this field). The case concerns the bulk interception of communications by the UK intelligence agencies pursuant to section 8(4) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 and the receipt by the United Kingdom of material intercepted by foreign counterparts. Following the ECtHR decision in Big Brother Watch and ors v United Kingdom4 the complainants submitted complaints to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) to discover whether the UK intelligence agencies had unlawfully obtained their information. The IPT refused to investigate on the grounds that the complainants lived outside the UK which would have left the complainants with no remedy. Before the ECtHR, the UK Government asserted that interception of communications by a contracting state did not fall within that State’s jurisdictional competence for the purposes of article 1 of the ECHR when the sender or recipient complaining of a breach of their article 8 rights (privacy and correspondence) was outside the territory. The Government sought to argue that the interference happened to the individual and therefore took place where the individual was located. The ECtHR disagreed and held that ‘interference with privacy of communications clearly 46 takes place where those communications are intercepted, searched, examined and used and the resulting injury to privacy rights of sender and/or recipient will also take place there’ (para 93); therefore any breach of the right to privacy fell within the territorial jurisdiction of the UK. This has potentially significant wider implications. For example, if child sex abuse material was created abroad but examined and used in the United Kingdom, would this engage the duty of the state to protect the victim and to what extent? The Court also considered of its own motion, and left open, an interesting evidential question about how an individual can establish victim status when they do not know through which states their online communications have passed (paras 96-100 refer). Right to life and recommender algorithms? Recommender and content moderation algorithms automate what people see or don’t see, what stays online and what gets promoted. Recommender algorithms are great if you want to find a pair of trousers, Christmas presents or a decent restaurant but have also been implicated in genocide, distortion and disruption of democracy, child mental health harm and suicide and other harms and often discriminate against persons with protected characteristics in terms of access to information and services. In 2022, an inquest5 found that Molly Russell, a 14 year old, died from ‘an act of self-harm whilst suffering from depression and the negative effects of online content.’ The recommendation of particularly graphic content both romanticising and portraying self-harm and suicide as an inevitable consequence of depression was found to have contributed to the death of Molly Russell, a young teenager who committed suicide in 2017, in a ‘more than minimal way’, In the Prevention of Future Deaths report, the coroner recommended legislation from government and self-regulation by platforms.6 Article 2 of the ECHR protects the right to life. The State has a duty to provide effective protection which consists of both an operational duty to take 47 action against a real and immediate risk to life in certain circumstances and to conduct an effective investigation following a death. The UK has enacted the Online Safety Act 2023 with the intention of better protecting children from the harms of online services and to enable relevant evidence to be obtained in the event of a death. Ofcom’s consultation on illegal harms duties closes in February 2024 and it will be consulting on draft codes of practice in respect of children in 2024 with guidance expected by Spring 2025.7 Whilst the clear steps to regulate online harms are welcome, there are significant concerns that the Act itself will lead to significant infringements of human rights including the rights to privacy, freedom of expression and association. These concerns persist despite assurances given during the passage of the bill, for example, that requirements to introduce child sex abuse material detection will not be implemented until the technology allows this to be done in a manner that protects privacy. Generative AI, image based abuse and deepfakes Images based rights abuses, discrimination and gender-based harm can be exacerbated by foundation models; generative AI has consistently been found to replicate and perpetuate gender and race inequality and stereotypes. Digital manipulation of images, sound and video impinge on the privacy and data rights protected under Article 8 of the ECHR. However, whilst images such as the ‘Pope in a puffa’ or a sci-version of your own image might be harmless fun, the reality is that deepfakes disproportionately harm women and girls. 90% of an estimated 85,000 deepfakes known to be circulating online in 2021 depicted non-consensual pornographic images of women. Used to harass and abuse, deepfakes are degrading, humiliating and discriminatory. A failure to protect in these circumstances potentially engages article 3, 8 and 14 of the ECHR. In Buturuga v. Romania8, the ECtHR recognised that cyberbullying is an aspect of violence against women and girls and that it can take on a variety of forms including cyber breaches of privacy, intrusion into the 48 victim’s computer and the capture, sharing and manipulation of data and images including private data. The Romanian authorities had considered the cyber elements of a court of conduct against women by her husband as a ‘data protection’ or civil issue rather than part of a course of conduct related to violence against women. The failure by the Romanian authorities to investigate cyber bullying from the perspective of domestic violence resulted in a failure to comply with positive obligations inherent in article 3 to protect the victim. The Court held that there had been a violation of articles 3 and 8. GREVIO’s General Recommendation No. 1 on the Digital Dimensions of Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence9 requires States Parties to the Istanbul Convention on combatting violence against women and domestic violence to recognise the digital dimensions of violence against women as a form of gender-based violence through taking necessary legislative and other measures to prevent and protect women and girls. Tech facilitated abuse is included in the Domestic Abuse: Statutory Guidance, July 2022.10 Additionally, the Online Safety Act 2023 seeks to remedy some of the protection gaps by imposing a duty of care on providers of regulated search services and end to end user services to prevent and remove illegal content including revenge pornography. Ofcom will consult on draft codes of practice in respect of pornography and the protection of women and girls in 2024, with guidance on gender-based harms expected by Spring 2025.11 The devil will be in both the detail and the implementation, in particular by police forces, and many commentators believe that the current guidance is insufficient and a protection gap remains. Surveillance technologies In R(on the application of Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales12 the Court of Appeal considered in the form of live facial recognition technology and found that there had been deficiencies in its deployment both in terms of article 8 ECHR and the Public Sector Equality Duty in the Equality Act 49 2010. Subsequent to that decision, the ECtHR ruled in Glukhin v Russia13 the use of facial recognition technology to identify, locate and arrest a peaceful protestor was in breach of articles 8 (right to privacy) and 10 (freedom of expression) of the ECHR and was capable of having a chilling effect on the rights to freedom of expression and assembly. The court held that in implementing facial recognition technology there is a need for detailed rules governing the scope and application of measures and strong safeguards against the risk of abuse and arbitrariness. The judgement is not without some difficulties. As noted by commentators it leaves unanswered two questions in particular: i) how to define the notion of publicly available data that can be used for facial recognition analysis and ii) when does the general public interest or nati9onal security test justify the use of facial recognition technology. Discrimination Artificial intelligence and automated decision making has exposed the existence and, to a degree, the extent of discrimination that currently exists in society across all forms of decision making. Predictive decision making tends to entrench pre-existing discrimination because it is embedded within the training data or the questions asked of that data by humans. This is the case even if the output of a predictive algorithm is also more accurate than human decision making. This is not a new problem. In 1986 the Commission for Racial Equality were informed by two senior lecturers at St George’s Hospital Medical School in London that a computer programme developed in the 1970s and used in the screening of applicants for places at the school unfairly discriminated against women and people with non- European sounding names. The programme was giving a 90-95% correlation with the grading of the selection panel and was ‘not introducing new bias but merely reflecting that already in the system’. However, the consequence of learning from previous selection panels’ decision resulted in the algorithm being weighted against women and those from racial minorities. 50 By way of more current examples discrimination in predictive decision making has been identified in almost every area where it has been introduced. From predictive policing (HART), sentencing decisions (COMPAS), visa triaging algorithms (UK Home Office), employment and recruitment software, the A-Level exam results fiasco, welfare benefits (SYRI in the Netherlands), facial recognition (Gender Shades), access to services and housing allocations. The extent of the discrimination is to such an extent that Wendy Hui Kyong Chun argues in ‘Discriminating Data’ that methods used within big data and machine learning are specifically designed to group ‘like’ people together thus encoding segregation, eugenics and identity politics through their assumptions and conditions.?

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue