On 8th August, UN member states in a landmark decision, particularly relevant to the present technological era, approved the organization’s first treaty on cyber crime. After reaching a unanimous decision, the UN Convention Against Cyber crime will now be presented to the General Assembly.
Background to the treaty:
The goal of this treaty is to “prevent and combat cyber crime more efficiently and effectively,” with an emphasis on money laundering and concerns related to images of child sexual abuse.
To seek consensus for the United Nations Convention Against Cyber crime, three years of discussions and a two-week session in New York took place. For formal approval, the treaty will now have to get the nod from the UN General Assembly. The treaty will take effect after ratification by 40 member nations.
Although there are other treaties on cyber crime originating from regional organizations—and some with a slightly broader scope, like the 23-year-old Budapest Convention—there has not been a legal framework that has been thoroughly debated and agreed upon by consensus among all UN member states until now.
Opposition by Human Rights Watch:
Human rights groups, however, are extremely concerned about this UN cybersecurity pact and warn that, as noted in an article by Human Rights Watch (HRW), it might cause more issues than it solves. They have identified three primary concerns: its wide reach, the absence of protections for human rights, and the dangers it poses to children’s rights.
The convention, supported by China, Russia and others, aims to tackle cyber crime worldwide. But the ambiguous and wide-ranging nature of its provisions have led to some important questions being raised as governments might abuse it to suppress dissent, restrict free speech, and tighten state monitoring. The broad definitions of cyber crime, which can result in the targeting of journalists and activists as well as make any online criticism of the government unlawful, are of special concern to HRW. These risks are further increased in authoritarian administrations which can misuse these to crack down on any opposition.
HRW warns that instead of being a tool for protecting people from cyber threats, the treaty could end up being a powerful instrument for government repression, undermining human rights and freedoms globally. The article, in fact, concluded by stating that rather than shielding people from the misuse of power, the proposed UN treaty against cyber crime could enable transnational repression and called on all governments involved in drafting this treaty to ensure that it does not compromise human rights or enable such abuses.
Deborah Brown of Human Rights Watch stated that the treaty “will be a disaster for human rights and is a dark moment for the UN.” She also called the treaty “a legal instrument of repression.”
