{"id":22697,"date":"2021-01-22T09:37:38","date_gmt":"2021-01-22T07:37:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/crjm.org\/?p=22697"},"modified":"2021-02-23T13:14:12","modified_gmt":"2021-02-23T11:14:12","slug":"accesul-la-internet-un-drept-al-omului","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/old.crjm.org\/en\/accesul-la-internet-un-drept-al-omului\/","title":{"rendered":"Is access to internet a human right?"},"content":{"rendered":"

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed us irreversibly. We work increasingly more from home, staff meetings have moved from conference rooms to ZOOM, and we shop more online to avoid going physically to stores. Even a consultation with a doctor can now take place in a virtual medical room during a telemedicine appointment.<\/p>\n

None of these changes would be possible but for one thing\u2014the Internet, the tool that allows us to adapt in a world where we have to isolate ourselves. That the Internet is essential in 2021 is an undeniable truth. During the pandemic, we managed to leverage the possibilities offered by the Internet. It has become an important medium of communication and contact with other people. Using the Internet, we have changed how we socialize, find information about what happens every day worldwide and locally, or conceive the idea of a new business.<\/p>\n

Can we consider, however, that access to Internet is a human right (much like the right to health or work)? Why do some states want to limit access to Internet? We try to find answers to these questions in this blog.<\/p>\n

What do human rights treaties say?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The signatories of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights<\/a> (UDHR)\u2014the main document addressing human rights protection internationally\u2014could not provide for the right of access to Internet for the simple reason that this invention would come to be piloted only 20 years later. The declaration was signed in 1948, whereas the Internet appeared by the end of 1968.[1]<\/a><\/p>\n

In the absence of a \u201cseparate right,\u201d access to Internet became integrated and interpreted as part of the fundamental right to freedom of expression. Freedom of expression is provided for in a series of international human rights treaties.[2]<\/a> It includes, among other, freedom of opinion and freedom to receive or communicate information irrespective of national borders. \u00a0<\/p>\n

\"Echr\"<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) <\/strong><\/p>\n

Article 10.<\/strong> Freedom of Expression<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \u201cEveryone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom <\/em>to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.<\/em><\/strong>\u201d […]<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    \u00a0<\/p>\n

    Given the lack of any frontiers on the Internet, it is rightfully the best facilitator of freedom of expression. Therefore, access to Internet can be viewed as a prerequisite for exercising freedom of expression, and any restriction of such access, a violation of this freedom.[3]<\/a><\/p>\n

    \u00a0<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    A curious case in the ECtHR\u2019s practice concerning the right of access to the Internet<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

    The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) partially addressed the issue of access to Internet as a separate right only in 2016 in Kalda v. Estonia<\/em><\/a>. That case concerned a prisoner\u2019s complaint about the refusal of the penitentiary\u2019s administration to allow him access to certain websites that contained legal information. The plaintiff especially complained that the denial of access to these websites had violated his right to receive information through the Internet and precluded him from conducting legal research concerning the legal proceedings that involved him.<\/p>\n

    The ECtHR held that there was a violation of Article 10 (Freedom of Expression) of the Convention and found that the authorities\u2019 refusal to grant the plaintiff access to the websites that contained legal information had violated his right to receive information. The Court noted in that case that the contracting states were NOT obliged to ensure access to Internet<\/strong>. That said, if a state decided to offer this access, it must give a thorough reasoning for the denial of access to certain websites to any users.<\/p>\n

    Can and will states regulate the Internet?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

    Neither a state nor an international institution is officially responsible for regulating the Internet. The governing of the Internet is based on states\u2019 joint efforts to ensure the principle of the neutrality of the Internet (net neutrality<\/em>).[4]<\/a> The neutrality of the Internet or net neutrality is the principle by which internet providers and state governments should treat all data available on the web equally, to ensure access for all users, without assuming exclusive regulatory and\/or supervisory powers.[5]<\/a><\/p>\n

    Internationally, in 2012, the United Nations\u2019 Council unanimously adopted a resolution that provided for the promotion, protection, and observance of human rights on the Internet.[6]<\/a> The resolution stated that any person should benefit of the protection of their rights equally and developed the principle \u201cwhat applies offline, applies online.\u201d<\/em> At the European level, the Council of Europe (CoE) developed several guidelines concerning the regulation of the Internet. According to the Internet Governance Strategy,[7]<\/a> the member states of the Council of Europe should ensure the following, among other things:<\/p>\n