Reconceptualising Cyber Security

The cyber security discourse is dominated by states and corporations that focus on the protection of critical information infrastructure and databases. The priority is the security of information systems and networks, rather than the protection of connected users. The dominance of war metaphors in the cyber security debates has produced a security dilemma, which is not sufficiently addressing the needs of people. This article underlines this shortcoming and views cyber security through a human-centric perspective. Freedom of expression and the right to privacy are under attack in the era of cyber surveillance. From a human-centric perspective such rights should be understood as a critical part of cyber security. Human rights protections need to be effectively addressed in the digital sphere and gain their place in the cyber security agendas.

Download Full-text

Introduction

10.1093/oso/9780198828570.003.0001 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Allan Hepburn

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Church Of England ◽

Freedom Of Expression ◽

Roman Catholicism ◽

Freedom Of Conscience ◽

Oxford Movement ◽

The Right To Privacy ◽

The Right ◽

Race And Religion ◽

The Church

In the 1940s and 1950s, Britain was relatively uniform in terms of race and religion. The majority of Britons adhered to the Church of England, although Anglo-Catholic leanings—the last gasp of the Oxford Movement—prompted some people to convert to Roman Catholicism. Although the secularization thesis has had a tenacious grip on twentieth-century literary studies, it does not account for the flare-up of interest in religion in mid-century Britain. The ecumenical movement, which began in the 1930s in Europe, went into suspension during the war, and returned with vigour after 1945, advocated international collaboration among Christian denominations and consequently overlapped with the promotion of human rights, especially the defence of freedom of worship, the right to privacy, freedom of conscience, and freedom of expression.

Download Full-text

Freedom of Expression and the Right to Privacy and Ethics in Dialectic of Human Rights in This Complex and Turbulent Society

International Journal of Project Management and Productivity Assessment ◽

10.4018/ijpmpa.2021070101 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (2) ◽

pp. 1-28

Author(s):

José Poças Rascão ◽

Nuno Gonçalo Poças

Keyword(s):

Social Networks ◽

Human Rights ◽

Online Social Networks ◽

Freedom Of Expression ◽

Technological Development ◽

Social Engineering ◽

Digital Data ◽

Right To Privacy ◽

The Right To Privacy ◽

The Right

The article is about human rights freedom of expression, the right to privacy, and ethics. Technological development (internet and social networks) emphasizes the issue of dialectics and poses many challenges. It makes the theoretical review, the history of human rights through and reference documents, an analysis of the concepts of freedom, privacy, and ethics. The internet and social networks pose many problems: digital data, people's tracks, the surveillance of citizens, the social engineering of power, online social networks, e-commerce, spaces of trust, and conflict.

Download Full-text

The Case Fontevecchia and D’amico Against Argentina

REVISTA INTERNACIONAL CONSINTER DE DIREITO ◽

10.19135/revista.consinter.00012.07 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 (12) ◽

pp. 179-190

Author(s):

Everson Alexandre de Assumpção

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Supreme Court ◽

Freedom Of Expression ◽

Scientific Article ◽

Vienna Convention ◽

International Treaties ◽

Right To Privacy ◽

The Right To Privacy ◽

International Court ◽

The Right

This scientific article was based on a case study, judged by the Argentine Supreme Court. In this process, the author filed a civil action in the civil court to compensate the damage against the authors, understanding that the right to privacy, privacy, honor and image rights were violated. The article sought to analyze the collision of principles, rules, rights and jurisprudence that led the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to rule in favor of Jorge Fontevecchia and Heitor D’amico. These were condemned by the Argentine State for understanding that there was a violation of the Right to Privacy. However, the international court decided to revoke the judgment passed and judged by the Supreme Court of the Argentine Nation, understanding that Fontevechia and D’amigo did not violate the Right to Freedom of Expression, making the action illegal and, therefore, forcing the Argentine State to withdraw the action and also to promote the due reparation of the damages caused to the. On February 14, 2017, the Argentine State rejected the decision of the Inter-American Court, transforming this case into one of the most famous “leading cases” of Argentine international public law. Finally, on October 18, 2017, the International Court issued another resolution to render the sentence in the Fontevecchia y D’Amico case ineffective. It was concluded, therefore, that even with the Argentine constitutional reform of 1994 and the granting of a constitutional hierarchy to international human rights standards, it was defined that the rules of international treaties “do not derogate from the provisions of the first part of the Argentine Constitution” under the terms of article 75, item 22, but attributed to the international treaties a character of complementarity, in addition to the prohibition, provided for in article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, to invoke reasons of domestic law for non-compliance in order to comply with international obligations. For the preparation of this scientific article, the deductive method and qualitative and descriptive research were used. As bibliographic references were used published materials, scientific literature, Law and Jurisprudence that were relevant to the purposes discussed here.

Download Full-text

Preventing the Police State

10.1093/oso/9780190685515.003.0019 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Sarah St. Vincent

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Freedom Of Expression ◽

International Human Rights Law ◽

Political Rights ◽

The Right To Privacy ◽

Human Rights Treaties ◽

Effective Remedy ◽

Access To Data ◽

The Right ◽

Mass Surveillance

This chapter is intended as a basic reference guide for lawyers, legislators, and advocates approaching the issue of mass surveillance—or surveillance more generally—through the lens of international human rights law for the first time. It focuses on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the human rights treaties that apply in Europe and the Americas, with a particular emphasis on the rights to privacy, freedom of expression and opinion, and an effective remedy for violations. Although the exact parameters of the right to privacy are still being decided, it appears increasingly clear that state interferences with any kind of communications data will generally be subject to a standard of strict necessity applied on an individualized basis, and there is presently a trend toward finding that mass surveillance—including systematic state access to data held or transmitted by the private sector—violates the human rights treaties.

Download Full-text

Privacy and Accountability of Public Figures

Advances in Public Policy and Administration - Human Rights and the Impact of ICT in the Public Sphere ◽

10.4018/978-1-4666-6248-3.ch013 ◽

2014 ◽

pp. 219-236

Author(s):

Despina Kiltidou

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Freedom Of Expression ◽

Fundamental Rights ◽

European Countries ◽

The Right To Privacy ◽

National Courts ◽

Public Figures ◽

The Media ◽

Principle Of Proportionality ◽

The Right

Regarding the regular violation of the right of public figures to privacy by the media, through its jurisprudence, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) imposes profound changes on European countries concerning the equilibrium between the fundamental rights of privacy and the freedom of expression in the media. The lack of violation of privacy in various European countries does not elicit unified solutions in case of damage as a result of breach of the right to privacy. Therefore, taking into account the particularities of national courts, it is evident that the court rules more objectively by investigating the facts on a case-by-case basis, within the margin of the principle of proportionality, creating a point of reference for national courts to follow and ensuring the protection of the freedom of expression, as initially established in the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). This chapter explores this.

Download Full-text

Is Social Media Challenging the Authority of the Judiciary? Rethinking the Effectiveness of Anonymised and Super Injunctions in the Age of the Internet

Journal of Legal Studies ◽

10.1515/jles-2016-0017 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 18 (32) ◽

pp. 39-87 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Thaddeus Manu ◽

Felipe Romero Moreno

Keyword(s):

Social Media ◽

Human Rights ◽

Freedom Of Expression ◽

The Internet ◽

Right To Privacy ◽

Legal Doctrine ◽

The Right To Privacy ◽

Procedural Law ◽

Fundamental Tension ◽

The Right

Abstract While freedom of expression has a long and well-established constitutional foundation as a self-governing concept, the right to privacy is a relatively recent norm in the constitutional orientation of the United Kingdom. Until the Human Rights Act 1998, the right to privacy had little standing constitutionally. Following on from this standard-setting, notably, both rights have taken on added importance in our modern technological society. Nevertheless, the formulation of privacy into a legal doctrine of human rights seems to have presented a fundamental tension in relation to freedom of expression. As a matter of legal logic, the courts, through a consideration of the law, examine the substantive legal issues in terms of a balancing process, whereby the interest in privacy is balanced against the interest in freedom of expression. It is a matter of broad principle for the courts to rely on injunctions as ancillary instruments of equity in doing justice in this field. Significantly, while the elementary norm of an injunction is that it commands an act that the court regards as an essential constituent to justice, unfortunately, many contend that judges have gone beyond this point, and this is shifting opinions. In fact, serious concerns have been frequently expressed about the extent to which the rich are easily able to invoke the discretion of the court to grant injunctions in a fashion that remains an antithesis to the principle of open justice and also undermines the exercise of freedom of speech. While this suspicion is not entirely new to matters of procedural law, the recent case, PJS v News Group Newspapers turned on this controversy. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to examine the complexity of celebrity privacy injunctions in the age of the internet and question its relevance, as we outline the extent to which social media is challenging the authority of the state (judiciary) in this direction.

Download Full-text

What Constitutes as Limitation of (Human) Rights in Indonesian Legal Context?

Hasanuddin Law Review ◽

10.20956/halrev.v3i3.1203 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 3 (3) ◽

pp. 290

Author(s):

Anbar Jayadi

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Freedom Of Expression ◽

European Convention ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

Political Rights ◽

Human Rights Protection ◽

The Right To Privacy ◽

Legal Method ◽

Legal Context ◽

The Right

This article reviews the interpretation of the Constitutional Court (the Court) on the Article 28J paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution by looking into the rulings related to the Information and Electronic Transaction Law. These rulings are chosen because, in those rulings, tensions between individual and public interest are apparent. For example, the tension between the right to privacy and freedom of expression, and the tensions between freedom of expression and public order. The rulings that will be studied in this writing are Ruling No. 50/PUU-VI/2008, Ruling No. 2/PUU-VII/2009, Ruling No. 5/PUU-VIII/2010, Ruling No. 52/PUU-XI/2013, and Ruling No. 20/PUU-XIV/2016. In studying those rulings, this article use a legal method namely the interpretation of arguments, e.g. what are the arguments provided by the claimants in the case in relation to the Article 28J paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution and how does the Court responds to such arguments. Additionally, this writing will also compare the rulings to each other to portray the “variety” of interpretation by the Court over the time. Furthermore, this article will compare the Article 28J paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution and the Court’s interpretation of it to other standards of limitation in other human rights instruments such as European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in order to depict what are the distinctive features of limitation of rights in Indonesian regime in comparison to other regimes. Last but not least, this article analyze what are the lesson learned from studying the Court’s interpretation and the possible consequence of such interpretation to the human rights protection in Indonesia.

Download Full-text

Anonymization of Court Decisions: Are Restrictions on the Right to Information in “Accordance with the Law”?

Baltic Journal of Law & Politics ◽

10.1515/bjlp-2016-0016 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 9 (2) ◽

pp. 150-170

Author(s):

Edita Gruodytė ◽

Saulė Milčiuvienė

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Freedom Of Expression ◽

Legal Regulation ◽

Court Decisions ◽

Right To Privacy ◽

The Right To Privacy ◽

European Court ◽

The Law ◽

Right To Information ◽

The Right

Abstract In Lithuania rules for the anonymization of court decisions were introduced in 2005. These rules require automatic anonymization of all court decisions, which in the opinion of the authors violates the public interest to know and freedom of expression is unjustifiably restricted on behalf of the right to privacy. This issue covers two diametrically opposed human rights: the right to privacy and the right to information. The first question is how the balance between two equivalent rights could be reached. The second question is whether this regulation is in accordance with the law as it is established in the national Constitution and revealed by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania and developed by the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. The authors conclude that the legislator is not empowered to delegate to the Judicial Council issues which are a matter of legal regulation and suggest possible solutions evaluating practice of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the European Court of Human Rights, and selected EU countries.

Download Full-text

The China Dilemma: Internet Censorship and Corporate Responsiblity

Asian Journal of Comparative Law ◽

10.1017/s2194607800000375 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 4 ◽

pp. 1-28 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Justine M. Nolan

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Global Governance ◽

Freedom Of Expression ◽

Chinese Government ◽

Right To Privacy ◽

The Right To Privacy ◽

State Actor ◽

Internet Censorship ◽

The Right

AbstractThe ever increasing nexus between human rights and business and the accompanying vagueness of concepts such as a company's ‘sphere of responsibility’ for human rights can, and has, created anxiety amongst companies. Considerations of human rights traditionally take place in the context of a state-based system of global governance; however, the rise of the corporation as a powerful non-state actor in recent decades has seen increased interest in understanding the emerging relationship between human rights and business and what, if any, responsibility business should assume for protecting human rights. This article considers the role played by U.S. technology companies such as Yahoo, Google and Microsoft in working with the Chinese government to censor internet content and thus intrude on the human rights to freedom of expression and opinion and the right to privacy. It concludes by focusing on the practicalities of protection and how human rights responsibilities might be apportioned between states and business and if so, how, when and why such an obligation might ensue.

Download Full-text