The digital age has transformed itself over time. Peer to peer networking has created new and free means of exchanging content and social media has made organizing people easier than ever. But these opportunities are not gone unnoticed by the government and some are now seeking to close off these opportunities. A healthy democracy is about more than just casting a vote every few years. For democracy to flourish people need to debate issues and exchange ideas freely to form associations and groups to share interest and to challenge powers, to protest through demonstrations. These activities are broadly covered by three rights- the right to freedom of expression, association and assembly. There is a growing recognition that a wide range of human rights depends on access to the internet. Considering the right to freedom of expression without accessing the most popular mode of communication, one cannot fully and potentially exercise his rights.

Freedom of expression, association and assembly all are protected in international and regional human rights treaties. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Right (UDHR) states that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression. These rights include freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Article 20 of the UDHR is similarly unequivocal. It states that everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful association and association but it is also important to note that none of these rights is absolute. They can all be legitimately restricted on the grounds of national security, public order and to protect the right and freedom of others. Restrictions both legitimate and illegitimate are common, but the importance of these rights in enabling democracy is also widely accepted. The right to freedom of expression, in particular, is often strongly protected in national laws and constitution and obstacles on its exercise usually attract media scrutiny. 

It’s hard to overstate the importance of these rights. All of them are crucially important in their way. Self-expression is a basic human impulse, enabling the exercise of good governance, society and economy. Without them, there is no innovation and no accountability. The internet has in many ways helped to realize and strengthen these rights. As a communication platform, it has given the marginalized and prejudiced group the voice with all the other technologies like television, radio denied them. It has also given these groups a safer stand to form an organization. But there are also instances where internet is used for harmful activities from online fraud and child abuse to harassment. The time has gone for the need to tackle these threats. But the problem arises in the path of these defences which often take the form of censorship, surveillance and closure. Such measures threatened the very characteristics that make the internet such a powerful enabler of human rights, its openness and potential for anonymity. That’s why human rights defenders need to fight for digital policies which are balanced, proportionate, evidence-based and grounded in human rights principles. 

As with other rights, national and regional courts have a crucial role in protecting the right to freedom of expression, assembly and association. The UN Human Rights Council and Special Rapporteurs are also important. The Special Rapporteurs for protection of human rights for example regularly seeks input from a range of stakeholders and forwards their findings to all UN member states. It is also important to hold governments accountable for respecting these rights. In cases where this is difficult at the national level going through bilateral and multilateral diplomatic channels is also an option. Apart from these, there are certain civil societies initiatives worldwide supporting these rights like HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH, ACCESS NOW, THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATIONS, Socio Medio Exchange (SMEX), AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL etc. As well as transparency and evidence gathering initiatives like onlinecensorship.org or the open observatory of network interference. Businesses are an important part of this ecosystem too. Sometimes tech companies like Facebook or Google can act like senses of content. Here pressure and criticisms for human rights defenders are vital. At other times however they may themselves be the victims of censorship or blocking or they may stand alongside civil society in opposing state measures as some Silicon Valley companies did when the controversial Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act was introduced in 2015 in the US.

One of the most known states infringing these rights is China’s Golden Shield Project also known as the great firewall of China. On a technical level, this blocks all incoming level contents from foreign sources that the government believes to be subversive. The government also has laws in place to arrest citizens who expressed his intentions both online and offline. While this is an extreme example. Recent element in France shows how similar measures can be introduced in a democratic country. In 2015 the French government passed controversial internet censorship laws in response to attacks in Paris. Among other things the law allows authorities to delist websites that they think insight earned doors to terrorism and dissolve groups of people deemed to be in threatening public order. Some fear that its vague wording could be utilized to criminalize legitimate forms of association and assembly both online and offline. In some cases, censorship measures like this can be circumvented with the help of tools like VPN or anonymity networks like Tor. But it is just as important for human rights defenders to bring public attention to this violation by gathering evidence, sharing stories and coordinating advocacy. But it’s not only states that violate these rights. In response to pressure from the governments and sometimes from its users, some companies are now acting as a judge for appropriate online behaviour. In early 2016, Twitter set up its Trust and Safety Council, a body tasked with curbing abuse and harassment on the online platform. The Council is composed of Civil Society Organizations specially selected by Twitter and there is little transparency about its role or remit. Facebook received a lot of criticism on its handling of these issues. On one side it is being accused of inaction over hate speech on its platform and on the other, it is being criticized for complying with state requests to remove content and block groups. But the matter of importance is that these companies also provide a crucial tool for assembling association. For example, the Arab uprising and the Umbrella revolution in Hongkong where the social media played a crucial role in organizing a demonstration. So, the role of companies for the realization of democratic rights is fading to black and white. It’s complicated and demands close attention from human rights defenders. 

Civil society groups have a crucial role in promoting freedom of expression, assembly and association nationally, regionally and in relevant global forums. Advocacy arguments should be based not just on the principle of human rights but on the practical advantages of these rights. Like encouraging and enabling a business environment, fighting corruption and improving governance. Where violations happen human rights defenders must monitor, record and document them. The media is one of the primary beneficiaries of free expression and therefore an important potential aligns in cases where these rights are under threats. Media reports drive public discourse and can help raise awareness among the wider population. However, these rights are not absolute and where restrictions are imposed human rights defenders should be arguing strongly for the due process so that any restrictions have judicial oversight and aren’t just executive decisions.