Freedom of Expression Online

The report, released by Nigeria-based Media Rights Agenda (MRA), evaluates the first two years of Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s presidency through the lens of media freedom in Nigeria. As threats to freedom of expression multiply – ranging from repressive laws and arrests of journalists to surveillance and censorship – the report documents media freedom violations by type of attack and perpetrator, non-compliance with the Freedom of Information Act, and misuse of the Cybercrime Act. Drawing from empirical evidence, legal and policy trends, and case studies, the report concludes by offering recommendations.

“While the rapidly emerging digital environment offers great opportunities for journalists to investigate and report information in the public interest, it also poses particular challenges regarding the privacy and safety of journalistic sources. These challenges include: mass surveillance as well as targeted surveillance, data retention, expanded and broad antiterrorism measures, and national security laws and over-reach in the application of these.”

This is a a handbook for legal practitioners on protecting the right to freedom of erxpression under the European Convention on Human Rights. The chapters  are: 1: General consideration on Article 10; 2: Duties under Article 10; 3 Unprotected speech-hate, speech, incitement to violence; 4: The system of restrictions within the exercise of the right to freedom of expression; 5: Limitations due to "public" reasons; 6: Freedom of expression and reputation; 7: Rights of others; 8: Freedom of expression and the media; 9: Freedom of expression and new technologies.

The report (A/HRC/32/38) addresses “the intersection of State regulation, the private sector and freedom of expression in a digital age. In it, the Special Rapporteur examines the legal framework that pertains to freedom of expression and principles applicable to the private sector, identifies key participants in the information and communications technology sector that implicate freedom of expression, and introduces legal and policy issues that he will explore over the course of his mandate.”

“Surveillance of individuals – often journalists, activists, opposition figures, critics and others exercising their right to freedom of expression – has been shown to lead to arbitrary detention, sometimes to torture and possibly to extrajudicial killings. Such surveillance has thrived amid weak controls on exports and transfers of technology to Governments with well-known policies of repression. In the present report, the Special Rapporteur begins by identifying the problem of targeted surveillance seen from the obligations that human rights law imposes on States and the related responsibilities of companies. He then proposes a legal and policy framework for regulation, accountability and transparency within the private surveillance industry. He concludes with a call for tighter regulation of surveillance exports and restrictions on their use, as well as a call for an immediate moratorium on the global sale and transfer of the tools of the private surveillance industry until rigorous human rights safeguards are put in place to regulate such practices and guarantee that Governments and non-State actors use the tools in legitimate ways.”

The report (A/HRC/23/40) “analyses the implications of States’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression. While considering the impact of significant technological advances in communications, the report underlines the urgent need to further study new modalities of surveillance and to revise national laws regulating these practices in line with human rights standards.”

“Threats to digital expression and Internet freedom are more pronounced than ever. Internet shutdowns have emerged as a popular means of information control. Government surveillance continues to intensify worldwide, jeopardizing the privacy and security of millions. Net neutrality – the long-held premise that all Internet data should be treated equally and without undue interference – has come under attack. In this increasingly hostile environment, what are the human rights responsibilities of the Information, Communications and Technology sector – particularly those actors that facilitate the provision of telecommunications and Internet access, and serve as gatekeepers of the digital infrastructure? To address this question, the Special Rapporteur first examines the role of States in undermining freedom of expression online, and what their obligation to protect this fundamental right entails. The Special Rapporteur subsequently evaluates the role of digital access providers – not just telecommunications companies and Internet service providers, which have become synonymous with digital access, but also non-consumer facing actors like network equipment vendors, content delivery networks, and Internet exchange points. Drawing on the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and best practices in the field, the Special Rapporteur proposes concrete steps that digital access providers should take to safeguard the freedom of expression of Internet users worldwide.”

Published by the INFORM Human Rights Documentation Centre, based in Colombo, Sri Lanka, the report reviews the country’s human rights record in 2024. Drawing from its monthly reports on the repression of dissent, the Centre has documented relevant court cases, legal reforms, the Tamil community activists demanding accountability for war crimes, and discrimination against LGBTQI+ individuals. With regard to press freedom, the report refers to cases of persecution, assaults, attempted abductions, and surveillance targeting journalists. The government has also curtailed the public’s right to peaceful assembly. In a blow to digital rights and freedom of expression, last January, the controversial Online Safety Bill was passed by a majority vote, despite warnings from civil society. 

Resolution 68/167 on the right to privacy in the digital age.

The report, compiled by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA), analyzes the impact of AI on digital rights across 14 countries: Cameroon, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, Tunisia, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. The study finds that unregulated AI-powered surveillance, along with “opaque content moderation practices,” chills speech and activism and restricts media freedom. CIPESA argues that without a rights-centered approach to AI, the technology “risks becoming a powerful tool that deepens existing inequalities, facilitates authoritarian control, and fundamentally undermines democratic values and human rights across the continent.”