Session
While the topic of economic and social inclusion and human rights is not new to internet governance, this issue area has been gaining strength as compared to previous IGFs. This was also reflected by the total number of workshop applications received (34%), which made this the issue group with the highest number of submissions. On the one hand, the increased importance of inclusion and human rights as compared to previous years may be attributable to the middle to long term tendencies as is also reflected in the UN Secretary General’s Road map for digital cooperation that identified inclusion and human rights as central to digital public goods. On the other hand, however, this new trend might at least partly be attributed to the disrupting effect of the still ongoing covid-19 pandemic. Social and economic consequences have affected societies to different extents and stressed the need to rethink the values that we want digital technologies and the internet to serve.
High-level speakers from government, business, academia, and civil society will discuss emerging trends, challenges, and opportunities.
Policy Questions:
- How can the rising significance of inclusion and human rights in societal debates and public awareness be explained?
- What new risks have emerged since the pandemic?
- How can we use new opportunities offered by digital technologies and the internet for positive change?
- What is the role of the IGF to promote economic and social inclusion and human rights?
Session Agenda:
Introductory remarks by a moderator, welcome to the audience, short description of the topic, and introduction of speakers (5 minutes)
First block - Discussion of trends, new opportunities, and risks (35 min)
- Short input talks of 4 speakers/panelists from different stakeholder groups (government, business, academia, civil society), 4 min per speaker (16 min in total)
- Possibility to respond to other speakers’ inputs, 2 min per speaker (8 min in total)
- Poll, ranking the top risks and opportunities identified by panelists
- Questions from the audience to all the panelists (10 min)
Second block - Discussion of governance strategies to promote inclusion and human rights, including the role of the IGF (35 min)
- Short input talks from speakers, 4 min each (16 min in total)
- Possibility to respond to other speakers’ inputs, 2 min per speaker (8 min in total)
- Poll, ranking the top governance strategies identified by panelists
- Questions from the audience to all the panelists (10 min)
Final discussion among audience and panelist (15 min)
Short summary of main points by the moderator and outlook to the main session at IGF 2021 (5 min)
Moderator: Courtney Radsch
Chat moderator: Afi Edoh
Speaker 1: Sarah Kiden, Technologist and researcher at Mozilla Foundation
Speaker 2: Jess N Kropczynski, Associate Professor at Cincinnati University
Speaker 3: Steve Crown, Vice President and Deputy General Counsel
Speaker 4: Scott P. Campbell, Senior Human Rights and Technology Officer from the United Nations Office Commissioner for Human Rights
Report
We need to reflect how tech serves humanity, versus just putting up safeguards around the edges and wait till harm occurs.
What is needed: Reliable human rights due diligence and impact assessments.
Covid Pandemic: Legitimate health concerns are being twisted to exclude people and violate their human rights.
Surveillance versus inclusivity - how can we make sure that more inclusion is not leading to more surveillance?
There exists the danger that surveillance measurements imposed during the pandemic are going to stay in place endlessly.
The concern was voiced that a whole new range of entry points for authoritarian regimes to silence critical voices and invade the public space have emerged.
It is the states’ duty to regulate technology and prevent potential harm of human rights.
There needs to be effective access to remedy when people are victims of human rights violations.
A moratorium for certain human-rights violating technologies that are not (yet) regulated adequately was discussed, namely facial recognition and biometric data collection and analysis.
There is an opportunity for positive change. But we need more transparency and ‘neutral’ research to address social and economic inequalities and human rights.
There needs to be a multi-stakeholder approach that is inclusive and democratic.
An increase of transparency and accountability in global decision-making and business practices of tech companies was demanded by participants.
The need for a legally binding agreement on technology and human rights was discussed. We would not need to start from scratch, but can build on already existing normative frameworks, among them most importantly the UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. There already exists legally binding treaty law, too, namely the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
There was a broad consensus that tech companies need to live up to their responsibility. > What does that mean? Human rights can give us a framework that is legally binding and universally valid.
IGF can set the compass to guide state actions and policy decisions.