scholarly journals No amount of “AI” in content moderation will solve filtering’s prior-restraint problem

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 205395172092068
Author(s):  
Emma J Llansó
Keyword(s):  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Online Content ◽  
Content Filtering ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
Proactive Measures ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Prior Restraint

Contemporary policy debates about managing the enormous volume of online content have taken a renewed focus on upload filtering, automated detection of potentially illegal content, and other “proactive measures”. Often, policymakers and tech industry players invoke artificial intelligence as the solution to complex challenges around online content, promising that AI is a scant few years away from resolving everything from hate speech to harassment to the spread of terrorist propaganda. Missing from these promises, however, is an acknowledgement that proactive identification and automated removal of user-generated content raises problems beyond issues of “accuracy” and overbreadth--problems that will not be solved with more sophisticated AI. In this commentary, I discuss how the technical realities of content filtering stack up against the protections for freedom of expression in international human rights law. As policymakers and companies around the world turn to AI for communications governance, it is crucial that we recall why legal protections for speech have included presumptions against prior censorship, and consider carefully how proactive content moderation will fundamentally re-shape the relationship between rules, people, and their speech.

scholarly journals Content Moderation Technologies: Applying Human Rights Standards to Protect Freedom of Expression

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 607-640
Author(s):  
Thiago Dias Oliva
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
Current Content ◽  
Human Rights Standards

Abstract With the increase in online content circulation new challenges have arisen: the dissemination of defamatory content, non-consensual intimate images, hate speech, fake news, the increase of copyright violations, among others. Due to the huge amount of work required in moderating content, internet platforms are developing artificial intelligence to automate decision-making content removal. This article discusses the reported performance of current content moderation technologies from a legal perspective, addressing the following question: what risks do these technologies pose to freedom of expression, access to information and diversity in the digital environment? The legal analysis developed by the article focuses on international human rights law standards. Despite recent improvements, content moderation technologies still fail to understand context, thereby posing risks to users’ free speech, access to information and equality. Consequently, it is concluded, these technologies should not be the sole basis for reaching decisions that directly affect user expression.

Hate-speech laws: consistency with national and international human rights law

Legal Studies ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 453-485 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McGoldrick ◽  
Thérèse O'Donnell
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Political Agenda ◽  
The Political ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Anti Semitism ◽  
International Human

Racism has climbed the political agenda at national, European and international levels. Reports from national and international non-governmental organisations (NGO’s) and inter-governmental organisations have focused considerable attention on racism and xenophobia and document an increase in racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism and race-related activities. As racism has climbed the political agendas, so there has been a substantial increase in the number of national, European and international legal instruments devoted to it. In particular, race-related restrictions on freedom of expression (‘hate-speech’) are increasing and seem likely to continue to do so. Such restrictions give rise to controversy in terms of constitutionality, legal policy and consistency with European and international human rights law. There are also differences of views between the policies of NGO's on restrictions on racist speech.

Lois Mémorielles in Post-Genocide Societies: The Rwandan Law on Genocide Ideology under International Human Rights Law Scrutiny

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 419-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
PIETRO SULLO
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Countries ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Law ◽  
Human Rights Standards

AbstractThis article discusses the Rwandan Law 18/2008 on genocide ideology in the light of international human rights standards. In order to put the genocide ideology law into context, it sketches a brief overview of the post-genocide scenario. Because of the influence that provisions restricting freedom of expression aimed at fighting negationism might exert on testimonies during genocide trials, it pays particular attention to the transitional justice strategies adopted in Rwanda. Finally, it assesses the law on the genocide ideology against the background provided by the measures implemented in some European countries to deal with the phenomenon of negationism.

scholarly journals Are Rights Out of Time? International Human Rights Law, Temporality, and Radical Social Change

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 817-838 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn McNeilly
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Change ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
Judith Butler ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
The Future ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Relationship

Human rights were a defining discourse of the 20th century. The opening decades of the twenty-first, however, have witnessed increasing claims that the time of this discourse as an emancipatory tool is up. Focusing on international human rights law, I offer a response to these claims. Drawing from Elizabeth Grosz, Drucilla Cornell and Judith Butler, I propose that a productive future for this area of law in facilitating radical social change can be envisaged by considering more closely the relationship between human rights and temporality and by thinking through a conception of rights which is untimely. This involves abandoning commitment to linearity, progression and predictability in understanding international human rights law and its development and viewing such as based on a conception of the future that is unknown and uncontrollable, that does not progressively follow from the present, and that is open to embrace of the new.

scholarly journals Freedom of Expression in Malaysia: Compatibility with the International Human Rights Standard

BESTUUR ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 44
Author(s):  
Saidah Fasihah Binti Che Yussoff ◽  
Rohaida Nordin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Right ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human

<p>Malaysia is likely to introduce new laws on freedom of information. However, the important questions are whether the said laws are effective and will have enough bite with the public looking forward to opening government policy. Freedom of information has developed under international human rights law as the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive and impart knowledge and ideas through media, regardless of any frontier. This paper aims to examine freedom of expression under the international realm, scrutinize the said freedom in the Malaysian legal framework, and discuss the proposed enactment of freedom of information laws in Malaysia in conformity with international human rights law. This research uses the qualitative research method. This paper concludes that freedom of information in Malaysia is severely impeded by the enforcement of the Official Secret Act. This paper calls for the repeal or amendment to the Act in conformity with international standards.  </p><p><strong>Keywords</strong><strong>:</strong> Expression; Freedom; Expression; Human Right.</p>

Human rights violations during the COVID-19 pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed R.M. Elshobake
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Content Type ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the most prominent human rights violations during the COVID-19 pandemic in accordance with international human rights law. Design/methodology/approach Through doctrinal and legal study and content analysis, this paper analyses the important relevant legal provisions under International human rights law and applies these provisions to the reality of managing the COVID-19 crisis to identify the most prominent human rights violations during the COVID-19 outbreak. This research paper considered as a review paper in that it provides a review of the most prominent measures taken during the COVID-19 crisis, which constitutes violations of international human rights law. Findings It is concluded that some measures that have been taken by countries to confront the COVID-19 pandemic have constituted violations of human rights and did not comply with the legal conditions to restrict human rights. Indeed, the COVID-19 pandemic has shown the ugly fractures in health-care systems, health inequities, racism and discrimination, Undermining the right to freedom of expression and the right to access information, gross negligence in protecting detainees from COVID-19 infection, all of these constitute clear violations of the principles of international human rights law. Research limitations/implications The spread of COVID-19 has not stopped, and its effects still continue, including human rights violations. Therefore, this paper cannot enumerate all human rights violations that occur during the spread of COVID-19. Practical implications Based on the results in this paper, governments need to be more prepared to face any health crisis at all levels including health care, which would reduce human rights violations. Social implications This research paper reflects positively on the social reality, as the adoption of its recommendations leads to the provision of adequate health care to all members of society in accordance with the principles of human rights, granting them the right to access information, protecting their right to freedom of expression, reducing the phenomenon of racism and discrimination and providing adequate health care to all detainees. Originality/value This paper studies an up-to-date topic that we are still living and seeing its effects. The benefit of this paper is to provide recommendations that protect human rights during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Title to Territory and JurisdictionThree and a Half Models

2020 ◽  
pp. 159-181
Author(s):  
Lea Raible
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Political Power ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship

The very term ‘extraterritoriality’ implies that territory is significant. So far, however, my argument focuses on jurisdiction rather than territory. This chapter adds clarifications in this area. It examines the relationship of jurisdiction in international human rights law, whether understood as political power or not, and title to territory in international law. To this end, I start by looking at what international law has to say about jurisdiction as understood in international human rights law, and territory, respectively. The conclusion of the survey is that the two concepts serve different normative purposes, are underpinned by different values, and that they are thus not the same. Accordingly, an account of their relationship should be approached with conceptual care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document