IGF 2025 - Day 4 - Workshop Room 6 - Networking Session #74 Mapping and addressing digital rights capacities and threats

>> MIA MARZOTTO: Good morning. Thank you for joining us for this networking session titled Mapping and Addressing the Digital Rights capacities and Threats. My name is Mia Marzotto, digital rights advocacy lead at Oxfam.

This week at IGF, we heard about deployment of digital technologies in more areas off daily lives and rapid rises of artifical intelligence increases urgency with which human rights digital age must be a prioritized focus.

Landscape looks like, in terms of digital rights, threats global majority communities, encourage new or stronger partnerships and connections between progressive actors in the digital governance space, collectively make sure return commitment of Leaving No One Behind into reality.

Oxfam, we believe effective digital governance should advocate for and redirect right an interests of all time. Needs and experiences should really determine future course of the digital age. Our mission is to quality and this includes tackling issue of digital inequality, end inequality. Growing concerning gap between benefit from digital technologies and those who don't.

In mid 2024, we launched ReCIPE, multi‑year project cofunded by the European UN that aims to provide fundamental rights in the digital age. Union partnership with civil society organizations from 10 countries working with some of the most vulnerable people in society for whom the risks as well as opportunities related to digital technologies are the greatest.

This session will proceed as follows. First we'll hear from five representatives from the civil society organization involved in ReCIPE project who will present key information, extract from primary research and analysis recently conducted providing snapshot of the current situation of the digital rights capacities and threats, in addition, victim service set of global majority countries. Move in discussion and encourage reflections and questions from audience both in the room and online.

So without further ado, let me quickly introduce my panel here of distinguished speakers where you wish to speak.

Mohamed Aded Ali, Somalia Non‑State Actors. To my right, Tran Thi Tuyet, program manager for Institute for Policy Studies and Media Development in Vietnam. Africa Theary Luy, head of program at the Cooperation Committee for Cambodia. Joining online, also Lu An Mendez, coordinator InternetBolivia online moderator.

So before focusing on the countries, I just want to make a few remarks on the overall methodology and demographics of the multi‑country assessment we conducted at the ReCIPE project to map the digital landscape threats and opportunities. This assessment included comprehensive set of questions relating to four main topics: Comprehensive digital literacy, internet access, digital violence and safety, current measures to prevent digital violence, perceptions on action needed to prevent digital rights. Nine‑country range of groups, community members, activists, journalist members civil society organizations.

Of course, we also looked at existing literature and other relevant studies and, importantly, validated the findings through workshops with the groups involved.

I will now pass it on to our panel to present key findings from each country as well as provide overview of ongoing efforts and lessons learned in their work to promote digital rights and accountable internet governance in their respective context. Would you like to start?

>>SNOW: Hello. Nice to meet you all here. Snow from the Institute for Policy Study and Media Development think tank based in Vietnam digital policy. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to share here. Without further ado, I will start my presentation.

In Vietnam, digital transformation also been national priority in recent years. Government rasing that digitalization is comprehensive societal. Government Leave No One Behind commitment to guarantee its own citizen can benefit from and participate in the digital area cornerstone of this digital rights for everybody, but notable progress, reality for Vietnam, many still marked by the barrier to digital assess and participation.

Our challenge and opportunity, ensure that digital rights and more and more people use digital service. Three to six locked in that platform, three to four times than a year ago. Half of all government services fully online. The number reflected countries from digitalization, but the real question is do these positive numbers actually means everyone can access to these services.

Official report show promising figure. Significant challenge amend and digital infrastructure, digital skills and digital access.

According to resource 2024, none of Vietnam's 63 three provincial service portal, multimedia standard user friendly or accessible portal for the main gateway for government service, so marginalized communities such as migrant workers getting access to these service more critical necessity for them claiming the entitlements and essential social protection policies.

As digital services become a part of daily life in Vietnam, concern about data protection and life safety are growing up and started building legal framework up. As the personal data protection decree and new laws challenge still remain, personal data protection and buying and selling of personal info without identification still happens. Yeah.

And misinformation in the online digital environments are common as 44% of our people in our recent research also state that they cannot clarify the information they saw was accurate or fake. So this confusion make it easier for the scammer, especially among people with limited digital skill, lack the marginalized community.

Survey by the national service security association found that one in every 220 smartphone user in Vietnam fallen for online scam. Several caller analyzer identified. Digital policy Vietnam still largely developed through a top‑down approach led by state agencies with consultation processes. Often from holistic and lack of meaningful engagement, remains participation in the marginalized community and organization during both design and implementation, digital policies formula of robust cooperation between the public sector, private sector, civil society and relevance, coder advocate for digital rights.

So from the perspective policy research organization, when remarkable persistent challenges ends, hence policy recommendations aims to provide strategy group that policy, technical and corporate dimensions, so we would like to highlight fundamental lessons.

First one is digital transformation as multi‑component ecosystem requiring synchronized between policy technology and people. Second one, policy design, participation mechanism and grassroots support. Institution is necessary.

Third one, ensuring digital rights, greater public participation in the transformation process and especially for marginalized groups.

And fourth one, establish multilevel, multilayer, and multilateral cooperation, strengthen policy voice and socialization in disadvantaged community.

Before I conclude my intervention, explore or reserve on this topic. Detailed recommendations are available by the QR code on the screen. Hope Vietnam's experience contribute to the global conversation on digital rights. Thank you for your attention.

>> MIA MARZOTTO: Thank you very much. From Vietnam to Bolivia.

>> CRISTIAN LEON: Sure. Thank you, Mia. Good morning to all the wonderful panelists, friends, participating on site and online. So represent organization called Internet Bolivia Foundation, digital rights organization established in 2018. We work to generate digital inclusion, protection of digital rights and fostering capacity most vulnerable population. Fight gender bias.

In a context, first one is digital divide still affects 30% of the population in urban areas and almost 70% in the rural areas, so we are really far from achieving a meaningful connectivity.

The second thing is strong perspective from the government legislators to push forward digital transformation, but digital transformation more motivate in digital technical solution than real necessities, and this is exposing people to potential use to rise such as privacy, freedom of speech, participation among others.

See very hostile environment for human rights defenders for women, activists, for LGBTQIA+ populations, all vulnerable population, they are connected without any safeguards to their participation.

That is why most of our work have been focused fostering capacity of this population, advocate for the respect of our rights. That is why we are working with ReCIPE group to join forces together with other organizations from the Global South and Global North for achieving these objectives. So we made mapping of the current threats and colleague.

Lu An connected. She will explain a little more about our results. Please.

>> LU AN MENDEZ: Thank you. Hi everybody. About the funding with we saw that 77 ‑‑ sorry. Digital security incident, 62% experienced some type of digital violence in the last year. Another important result was that 77 say that actions of the digital violence effect may have specific relationship with their status as consumer right defenders. Very important result. Another thing, forming threats, identify harassment, hate speech, physical threat, sexual threats, and public defamation.

In order to respond, way of responding to the previous result was creation of network of feminists collectives. Some generate support for the digital security among collectives and organization by creating own protocol and sharing experience, knowledge, and skills.

And on the subject about security, another thing that technologies with practical dynamics identified such as awareness‑raising session. Based for recent reflection and articulation for advocacy, public policies in the public political arena, this network seeks to provide support to big themes, carry out collective prevention actions.

It's important to mention that this network is composed of a very large feminist collective that believe that now are working strategies in Bolivia creating recent, what we call metallurgies in order to improve digital security.

Thank you very much to you both. Do you want to talk about us, Cambodia?

>> THEARY LUY: Good morning. I want to speak, sorry. Wanting to speak on behalf of Cooperation Committee of Cambodia, CCC. CCC membership of organization in Cambodia work in inclusive partnership to promote good government and environment and sustainability for civil society organization in Cambodia, and currently head 200 NGOs as a member including the local and international. Besides that, also collaboration based NGO world ground level. Member for 100 NGOs back to digital content Cambodia.

Cambodia additional crossroad that over the past decade, witnessed rapid growth of internet, transformative people, how people communicated and effectively information, digital role has no time. I would like to highlight challenges based on the key finding of the research. First is about digit literacy remain alarmingly low in Cambodia.

Based on the research, person of Cambodians, especially rural youth and grassroots civil society organizations, need to navigate the digital effectively. This digital divide is not just about access to technology, but it's about access to the opportunity to participation and to the protection.

Second, our legal framework is touching the apple. Cambodian have digital woman policy 2022 to 2035, focus on the three pillars administration about the digital government and digital economy and digital citizen. Cambodia like comprehensive law as civil law in the drafts form in process. This law including cybersecurity law, cybercrime law, and personal data protection law.

Last one of the third, absence of clear and right registration, make citizen not be vulnerable to misinformation and youth. This growing distress in the digital platform due to the online scam, online gaming, that straw that we must repeal. However, there is a hole and there is an action. CCC read provincial network to promote the digital and security, this local organized training, but not only receive training, but they become trainer themselves to transfer the knowledge to their members and also their community, and also engaging the youth and social influencer to lead the page that digital rights are for.

Another thing is importance of work in the policy dialogue. Believe in the multistakeholder approach and inclusive dialogue bringing together government, civil society, development partner and also private sector to raise awareness of the digital law and policy and to ensure voices of those civil society are heard and the relationship for multistakeholder dialogue and not consultation, but it's a way to build trust of multistakeholder.

So from this effort, we learned that the local ownership inclusively and youth engagement is key in building a digital future that is safe and equitable and empowering for Cambodia citizen and also the world. So yes. Thank you. 

>> MOHAMED ADED ALI: Thank you very much. Multi‑platform civil society organization dedicated to promoting these rights as well as it is. ONSA supports government speech and democratization in digital age. I would like to thank panelists, IGF community, and IGF Secretariat who organized this significant IETF event.

General context, Somalia oversight and barriers are limited to advocacy digital advocacy. Human rights, gender, economic climate, justice, and advocate digital access to help drive equitable accountability. Gender, quality, human rights, empowers citizens to voice to leaders and hold leaders accountable. Building digital capacity rights awareness and navigate maximum impact is critical for Somalia organizations.

Somalia, we have different stakeholder. Digital and internet sector, institutional sectors, private sectors, and other civil society organizations is mainly human rights defender.

We have digital rights authority. DPA National and education and administration authority, NERA. National Communication Authority, NWCA, where Somalia Association Technology Institute, companies at sector, actors and human rights organizations, and members.

2024, SOSA conducted assessment detail rights capacity. That capacity focused on internet access, digital literacy, social media users, digital rights, rates awareness, and security. We funded during the assessment, number one, internet access, 98% of population connected primary networks from homes, workplace, use internet public service and friendly network in terms of literacy. 98 reported that the style is basic digital literacy very important. 90 concepts through messages and receive emails. Facebook and TikTok, 44% was population mainly youngest that they are using social media.

Youngest Facebook and TikTok, 2%, they use as YouTubers users as well as politicians. And decisionmakers use it professionally in purpose of their work and explain their achievement in terms of government issues as well as assessment. Raised digital rights awareness to 8% understand risk and sharing personal information online, as well additional violent, 2% experience digital violence whereby 7% reports gender‑based incidents like harassment, other sexual.

In terms of digital security, 4% is incident. 69% adapted basic measures reporting updates, but advanced practices and secure conversation marked security as education to remain limited. We have ongoing efforts as strategy, civil society organizations in skills to deliver workshops and private citizens finding attack awareness. Phishing, safe device practice, and very important, raising public awareness, nation‑wide campaign on tech‑facilitated, gender‑based violence and online safety through radio, social media, as well community forums.

Other one, engage policymakers is very important to convince policy dialogue and council on conduct, going to society organizations within mechanisms to align equity from digital rights protection, sustained capacity‑building, build practicality toolkits, digital checklist, and citizen reports to guide us. Templates policies provide flow of support so CSO can apply updates and practice over time.

So thank you very much. I need to conclude my presentation. Over to you.

>> MIA MARZOTTO: Thank you Mohamed. We'll go to Khadeja online.

>> KHADEJA IBRAHIM: Hello everyone. Thank you for having me. Thank you Mia. So I'm calling in from the West Bank. I work with the organization called MIFTAH. Work domestically and providing good government and democracy highlighting Israeli violation affected women and girls, gender‑specific ways, back digital rights violations, unfortunate nonexistent, digital rights are not nonexistent, face variety of violations.

To give a quick overview, Israel use of advanced surveillance including biometric data collection and AI fakes recognition real life physical implications, arrests, restriction of movement, and even targeted killing. We've seen development of AI tools such as Blue Wolf and Lavender deployed monitor and control Palestine movement without often legal oversight.

Often have a lot of social media censorship. Palestine content subject to arbitrary censorship. Account inspection surveillance on platforms Facebook and Instagram. The Facebook law vague anti‑terrorism legislation weaponized to criminal online dissent and restrict freedom of expression, repressive technology West Bank. Discriminatory process limit Palestine access to ICT infrastructure, Palestine 3G network.

Settlers full bank have access to 4G and 5G network seeing huge shrink in civic space. Civil society actors, journalists, activists, face intimidation, arrests, and spyware targeting through Israeli tech. Does speak of map assessment that we've done in MIFTAH.

355 organizations, West Bank, Jerusalem, Gaza Strip, defines first we see widespread gap in digital awareness around security companies, so 23% CSO lack basic rights. This .5 raise digital threats high. 50%, no digital rights protection policies. And also see that after October 2023, by severe challenges, 40% institutions face direct digital violation including content deletion, hate speech, and hacking. 43% reported difficulties in internet access and communications during escalation in escalations in Iza and Jenin. 55% reduced digital activity due to threat and only 20% had digital emergency response plans.

We also had institutional vulnerability due to limited resources. Nearly 75% CSO lack technology resource. 55% lack damage knowledge. 36% lack legal support. Small or medium size institutions more knowledgeable. No support post‑October 203. Risk more high.

There is a lack of legal and policy framework languages. 72% of CSO unaware of local digital rights legislation. Over half of them believe that existing cybercrime laws may be ineffective, unsure of their effectiveness.

Nearly 62% of CSOs believe that the Palestinian government not doing enough to protect digital rights and we see overwhelming majority of them urgent need for capacity‑building and international support.  This means many of them seek security training and want training on digital rights to raise awareness.

To speak of the main activities that we've been doing at MIFTAH, two rounds of training digital rights for CSO and CBO marginalized communities across the West Bank. We've had policy meeting with CSOs on the cybercrimes draft law. We've hosted diplomat briefing with diplomats based in Palestine, digital rights reports.

Also continuing to produce social media content based on evidence‑based research. Plan to start a podcast series based on that as well. And we have participated at the Palestinian activism forum in March hosted by the organization HuMENA where we will continue doing the work that we have been doing for the past year.

That's it for my end. Thank you.

>> MIA MARZOTTO: Thank you so much. I just would like to underline how clear it is every time I hear guys speak on that as there are clear difference between the various countries you come from and communities you work with, there are some common digital rights issues and threats.

Important work from civil society organizations like ones you represent which shows that better more rights respecting digital ecosystem is possible.

So open it up to any questions or reflections from the audience to any of the speakers in general. We have few questions that we came up with, I can hear from you. Any and all questions are welcome from those listening in online. There are mics to the side of the room in case anybody wants to ask any questions. Otherwise, I know I have questions for our panel here.

Questions? Maybe I will break the ice with a question to you, then I also monitor online if there are any questions.

One question to all, any of you who want to answer, can you share a little bit more what you have done in terms of sharing these important research findings and analyses with stakeholders and due to barrier national level and been reactions or action taken on their part.

How have you communicated about those actions back to the groups involved in the research, like to establish meaningful two‑way accountability in the digital governance. Anybody would like to start?

>> AFRICA THEARY LUY: Yeah. From Cambodia. Based on finding that we conducted research in Cambodia, organized work finding to stakeholder, we validate the request, like I mentioned, about action conducted at the ground level in terms of the training to their grassroots organization, and also the community there, and for that, not only the digital tour, but also about policy implementation, the voice of the community, voice of the civil society tool, consideration in the policy framework. So policy that I mention is very important.

We plan in 3 July, and also end of this year, for the policy dialogue that allowed all the community and civil society ground level, and they present to maybe policymaker to raise all the challenges, so why the multistakeholder is very important. That's not for the consultation, but it's a platform that changes and consider the demand of the community. Thank you.

>> MIA MARZOTTO: Thank you. Anyone else wants to take the question?

>> Yeah. As Lu An mentioned, in Bolivia, we are clearing this network of grassroots women's organizations, that they want to work together until this, but from bottom‑up perspective with idea of not only creating tools, digital security tools or others, but also to carry out advocacy actions together.

This is really important because in Bolivia, we are in a moment of elections and these moments really normally open a window to create new policies and to discuss things with politicians. So I think this is very key moment in order to organize, to create coalitions and to advocacy to go talk to one of the advocates together. One of the actions we are doing, InternetBolivia Foundation. 

>> MOHAMED ADED ALI: Thank you very much. In our countries, in terms of digital arena, is new ecosystem because mostly civil society organizations and other individuals have challenged in terms of capacity.

Knowledge in digital mostly in Somalia, private sector, as well as the civil society organizations are concentrated in terms of digitalization and as well as using other technologies, but mostly, the population or the community didn't have much knowledge on digital or this.

After we started this ReCIPE project, engage different stakeholders, mainly decisionmakers, for example, government institutions in terms of legislative being some of this are still there drafting and some of the policies are online digital content. Still not pass it. That's where we are.

Our countries, no engagement. Make coordination with different stakeholder, establish digital platform organizations as the digital task force community, which is comprised of decisionmakers, civil society organizations, and tech companies to work together considering these digitalizations a basic right of individuals.

>> MIA MARZOTTO: Perhaps would you like to come in on this? I know you mentioned the Palestine digital activism form. 

>> KHADEJA IBRAHIM: We're part of the Palestinian Digital Rights Initiative Coalition, which is group of CSOs work in the realm of digital rights within Palestine. We contribute with them on a monthly basis, share findings, insight, and learn from each other.

Also learn about upcoming opportunities with one another as well. So through this coalition, that we were actually concerned, also to apply to P‑DRAF, Palestinian Digital Rights Activity Form. Two‑day forum of speakers, panels, workshops, teaching about digital rights and Palestine. We participated in that and were able to reach audience within Palestine, like students, other organizations, other activists. So that was really a great opportunity for us as well.

In addition to that, we just continue to share our content online through social media. We find that social media is a very effective tool to reach people, not only internationally, but internally domestically as well. So we have students, universities, and Palestine who have reached out to us because of our content, asking more questions, maybe doing research on the topic, so we were able to help them in that capacity.

>> MIA MARZOTTO: Thank you.

Snow?

>> SNOW: I think Vietnam act as bridge and a facilitator for this process. Typically bottom‑up approach starting from the grassroots level through survey consultation and other participatory activities to include input from all relevant stakeholders. Organizer in‑depth discussion to share with policymakers to share the findings, clear and actionable recommendation, so that we can work alongside with policymakers to drive positive change.

Last three years, we have been heavily involved in the issue related to digital governance and public service delivery, and once the concrete recommendations, we have recommendation about consolidating all 63 provincial portal in single national portal, as I have mentioned in my presentation, then adopted by the policymaker.

And additionally, I would use experiences assessments, adopted part of the national standards and continue to work closely with the policymakers and other government authorities to refine the agenda taken, what has become much easier to bring the policymakers, government, agencies, representatives, and other civil society organizations together for that dialogue. I think that's all.

>> MIA MARZOTTO: Thank you. Brave soul in the room with questions? Reflections? No? Okay, I do have a final question, please. Would you like to come up to the mic? Thank you.

>> NISFUTA: Hello. Thank you everyone. I don't know if you can hear me. Nisfuta from Zambia. Technical background, standards engineer. Talk briefly, I think, on question 3 on digital rights and digital governance.

Amazing presentation. Highlighted one thing. I noticed that there are interlinked with issues that we're facing in different regions. Talk of Asia, South America, Africa, one called digital literacy, which has been challenging their terms of accessing rights.

So with regards to that question, one of the things that I would like to see international community to work on is you stated access is a right, but something that blocks access when it comes to the government, they'll say safeguards platforms from misinformation and deep fakes and everything, so there is a need to balance cybersecurity resilience while affording freedom of expression and also access.

Example that I would give you is, few minutes, how my country has enacted, has amended this cybersecurity crime and law of 2025, and this bill was assented in a private manner. Society came to learn about it. It created perception out there to say this is bad law, trying to curtail our freedom of speech and access and everything.

So it was a situation where, now, people started throwing names and everything, those type of stuff, arrests, stuff like that. I wouldn't blame the government, always there are some cybercrime offenders, but on the other hand, some people who were ignorant about this law, not much awareness and everything. So encourage civil society space to advocate for algorithm protection that can tackle misinformation, and also deep fakes, because once information, which is wrong, is sent out there, it is weaponized, and once it's weaponized, it creates perception in the minds of users.

When it creates that perception, users themselves, they are going to be limited by that information, they're going to accept it, so in short, going to accept that definition. When you accept the definition, it will end up limiting you. When you are limited by that information, you live by it because you believe it.

Just my observation about this. Let's work together, civil society, tech community, find ways how we can tackle this misinformation and defects. Thank you very much.

>> MIA MARZOTTO: Only one minute left. I'm sure lots of thoughts around on this. I think this is definitely something that we reason why spaces like the IGF are really important. Multistakeholder approach very important. And I think that in that balancing exercise, which you mentioned, having diversity of voices and experiences participate is really important to find the right balance because it is a balancing act indeed.

Like I mentioned, this is the start of the conversation, hopefully, although I know that it may be the last day of this IGF, but we do want to continue the conversation.

Some resources at the back and, of course, you can come up to us to have our contact details.

I want to thank you all panelists and also to those online and in the room and in the technical team making this hybrid session possible. Again, thank you and have safe travels back home and let's continue the discussion. Thanks again.

[applause]