Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T14:26:00.148Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

United Nations General Assembly Resolution on the Right to Privacy in the Digital Age

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Anupam Chander  and
Molly Land
Anupam Chander
Affiliation:
California International Law Center University of Connecticut School of Law and Human Rights Institute
Molly Land
Affiliation:
California International Law Center
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Although it provides limited normative guidance, the General Assembly’s recent resolution, “The right to privacy in the digital age,” signals both renewed international interest in the human right to privacy as well as a commitment by United Nations (UN) institutions to explore the meaning of this right in the digital age.

Type
International Legal Materials
Information
International Legal Materials , Volume 53 , Issue 4 , August 2014 , pp. 727 - 731
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, G.A. Res. 68/167, U.N. Doc. A/RES/68/167 (Dec. 18, 2014) [hereinafter G.A. Res. 68/167], available at http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/68/167.

2 Press Release, U.S. Dept. of Justice, U.S. Charges Five Chinese Military Hackers for Cyber Espionage Against U.S. Corporations and a Labor Organization for Commercial Advantage (May 19, 2014), http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2014/May/14-ag-528.html.

3 By the time the resolution was approved by the General Assembly’s Third Committee, the sponsors included Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Denmark, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Ireland, Latvia, Lebanon, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Malta, Mexico, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, Suriname, Switzerland, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Turkey, Togo, Ukraine, and Uruguay. The Third Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. U.N. GAOR 68th Sess., 51st 3rd Comm. Mtg. at 6, U.N. Doc. A/C.3/68/SR.51 (Nov. 26, 2013), available at http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/C.3/68/SR.51; U.N. GAOR 68th Sess., 43rd 3rd Comm. Mtg. at 8, U.N. Doc. A/C.3/68/SR.43 (Nov. 7, 2013), available at http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/C.3/68/SR.43; U.N. G.A., 3rd Comm., Revised Draft Resolution, Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, U.N. Doc. A/C.3/68/L.45/Rev.1 (Nov. 20, 2013), available at http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/C.3/68/L.45/Rev.1

4 U.N. G.A., 3rd Comm., Draft Resolution, Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, U.N. Doc. A/C.3/68/L.45 (Nov. 1, 2013).

5 Colum Lynch, Inside America’s Plan to Kill Online Privacy Rights Everywhere, FOREIGN POLICY: THE CABLE (Nov. 20, 2013, 1:10 p.m.), http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/11/20/exclusive_inside_americas_plan_to_kill_online_ privacy_rights_everywhere.

6 Colum Lynch, U.S. to Back Privacy Resolution It Knee- Capped, FOREIGN POLICY: THE CABLE (Nov. 23, 2013, 8:55 a.m.), http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/11/23/the_us_to_back_privacy_resolution_it_knee_capped.

7 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. Res. 217 (III) A, U.N. Doc A/RES/217(III) (Dec. 10, 1948).

8 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 17, opened for signature Dec. 19, 1966, 999 U.N.T.S. 171 (entered into force Mar. 23, 1976).

9 Id.

10 Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Rep. of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Human Rights Council, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/23/40 (April 17, 2013) (by Frank La Rue) [hereinafter Rep. of the Special Rapporteur].

11 Human Rights Comm., General Comment No. 34 on Article 19: Freedoms of Opinion and Expression, ¶15, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/GC/34 (Sep. 12, 2011); Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Rep. of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Human Rights Council, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/17/27 (May 16, 2011) (by Frank La Rue); Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, The Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression: Rep. of the Special Rapporteur, Comm’n on Human Rights, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/2006/55 (Dec. 30, 2005) (by Ambeyi Ligabo); Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Rep. of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Comm’n on Human Rights, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/2002/75 (Jan. 30, 2002) (by Abid Hussain).

12 See Rep. of the Special Rapporteur, supra note 10, ¶¶ 15–17.

13 G.A. Res. 68/167, supra note 1.

14 Id.

15 See, e.g., MARKO MILANOVIC, EXTRATERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES: LAW, PRINCIPLES, AND POLICY (2011); Peter Margulies, The NSA in Global Perspective: Surveillance, Human Rights, and International Counterterrorism, 82 FORDHAM L. REV. 2137 (2014).

16 Fourth Periodic Report of the United States of America, Human Rights Comm., ¶¶ 504–510, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/USA/4 (May 22, 2012); Replies of the United States to the List of Issues, Human Rights Committee, ¶ 2, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/USA/ Q/4/Add.1 (Sept. 13, 2013).

17 Charlie Savage, U.S. Seems Unlikely to Accept That Rights Treaty Applies to Its Actions Abroad, N.Y. TIMES, Mar. 6, 2014; see also Beth Van Schaack, The United States’ Position on the Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Obligations: Now is the Time for Change, 90 INT’L L. STUD. 20 (2014).

18 See Lynch, supra note 5.

19 Rep. of the Special Rapporteur, supra note 10, ¶ 29.

20 Id. ¶¶ 54–62, 65–71.

21 Id. ¶¶ 82–83, 91–94.

22 Case C-131/12, Google Spain SL v. AEPD, 2014 EUR-Lex 62012CJ0131 (May 13, 2014).

23 Trudo Lemmens, Access to Pharmaceutical Data, Not Data Secrecy, is an Essential Component of Human Rights, UNIV. TORONTO FACULTY OF LAW BLOG (April 8, 2014), http://www.law.utoronto.ca/blog/faculty/access-pharmaceuticaldata-should-be-framed-human-right-not-data-secrecy.

1 Resolution 217 A (III).

2 See resolution 2200 A (XXI), annex.

3 A/CONF.157/24 (Part I), chap. III.

4 A/HRC/23/40 and Corr.1.