A non-binding resolution passed by the United Nations Human Right council against countries that deliberately limit their citizen’s internet access. The resolution was passed by consensus and was opposed by a minority such as the Russians, Chinese, and Saudi Arabians who are well known for practising the authoritarian form of government. We also had South Africa and India who were democratic parties but were against the resolution.
The nations all seemed to be against a particular phrase in the resolution though, which “condemns unequivocally measures to intentionally prevent or disrupt access to our dissemination of information online” and all called for the UN to delete such passage.
The resolution was built on the UN’s previous statements on digital rights, reaffirming the organization’s stance that “the same rights people have offline must also be protected online,” in particular the freedom of expression covered under article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
So apparently, those countries might have a hard time stopping the UN!
The UN did make it clear that the resolution can’t be legally enforceable but pressurizing the government and emphasising on the digital rights around the world with actions from delegated advocates, the UN plans to make impact especially they strongly feel that most government use the method as a mean to control citizens in minor matters.
The Digital rights group Access, confirms that there were at least 15 internet shutdowns in 2015 all over the world, and the number of 20 in 2016, most times over matters which don’t require such a risk action.
I’m thinking there are both upsides and downsides to this if you think about it but let’s see who goes to the winning side; would it be the UN or the protesting countries?
