Related Post
I adopted United Nations A treaty to combat cybercrime is the first text of its kind to be approved by the organization, despite strong opposition from human rights activists who warned of the dangers it could entail and some described it as a tool for surveillance.
After three years of negotiations and a final two-week round in New YorkMembers unanimously approved the treaty, called the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime, on Thursday, and it is now set to be submitted to the General Assembly for formal adoption.
The treaty's objectives include “preventing and combating cybercrime more efficiently and effectively,” particularly with regard to child sexual abuse and money laundering.
Algerian diplomat Fawzia Boumaiza Mbarki, head of the treaty drafting committee, announced yesterday, Thursday, the adoption of its texts at the conclusion of a session held for this purpose.
The treaty drafting committee was established following an initial initiative by Russia in 2017, despite opposition from the US and Europe.
Concerns and criticisms
Opponents of the treaty, a mix of rights activists and big tech companies, criticize its broad scope, arguing that it could be a global surveillance treaty that could be used to suppress freedoms.
The treaty stipulates that any member state may, when investigating any crime punishable by imprisonment for a term of not less than 4 years under national law, request from the authorities of another state any electronic evidence related to the crime, and it may also request data from Internet service providers in this regard.
Deborah Brown of the organization considered Human Rights Watch It would be a “catastrophe for human rights and a dark moment in the history of the United Nations.”
The treaty was described as an “unprecedented multilateral monitoring tool.”
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has also expressed serious reservations about the text of the treaty, and this week called on states to ensure that it respects human rights.
During the session to approve the text of the treaty yesterday, Thursday, she demanded that… Iran By deleting several items that she said had major flaws.
One of the paragraphs that Iran objected to states that “nothing in this agreement may be interpreted as authorizing the suppression of human rights or fundamental freedoms such as freedom of expression, opinion, religion or belief.”
But the majority of those present rejected the Iranian request, with 102 votes against, 23 votes in favor, and 26 abstentions.
