The UN General Assembly and the Fight Against the Cybercrime Treaty

Note on the update: The text has been revised to reflect the updated timeline for the UN General Assembly’s consideration of the convention, which is now expected at the end of this year. The update also emphasizes that states should reject the convention, with the U.S. leading its allies in voting no. Additionally, a new section outlines the risks associated with broad evidence-sharing, particularly the lack of mandatory, robust safeguards needed to act as checks against the misuse of power. It raises concerns that while states may codify the authorizations into law, they may fail to implement the necessary safeguards. We’ve made it clear that human rights must be integrated into the treaty, but unfortunately, the rights section falls short. Please note that our piece in Just Security and this post are based on the latest version of the UNCC.

The final text of the United Nations Convention Against Cybercrime, adopted last Thursday by the United Nations Ad Hoc Committee, is now headed to the UN General Assembly for final approval. The last hours of deliberations were marked by drama as Iran repeatedly, though unsuccessfully, attempted to remove almost all human rights protections that survived in the final text, receiving support from dozens of nations. Although Iran’s efforts were defeated, the resulting text is still nothing to celebrate, as it remains riddled with unresolved human rights issues. 

The Fight Moves to the UN General Assembly

States will likely consider adopting or rejecting the treaty at the UN General Assembly later this year. It is crucial for the U.S. to take the lead in uniting allies to vote against it. This moment offers a key opportunity to push back and build a strong, coordinated opposition.

Over more than three years of advocacy, we consistently fought for clearer definitions, This article has been indexed from Deeplinks