How can liberals work to ensure transparency and accountability in the use and collection of personal data? How can regulatory systems be built robustly enough to withstand both ignorant and malevolent governments? Can individual rights online be secured at a global level?
These were some of the questions addressed on Wednesday 1 July, when Liberal International in cooperation with the European Liberal Forum gathered policy-makers and experts from across the world to discuss some of the most pressing issues for the coming years. This policy lab was the first in a series organised by the LI Human Rights Committee under its priority area of Digitalisation & Human Rights.
Speaking in the discussion that opened the session, moderated by MEP Karen Melchior (Radikale Venstre, Denmark), Hong Kong privacy activist Glacier Kwong reflected on the implications of the new so called security law which had been brutally enforced in Hong Kong and what it means for digital rights.
“This is more far-reaching than any other Chinese internet-related law. It aims to create fear and self-censorship online. The great firewall of China has only one goal – to control what others can and cannot see. It is now expanding rapidly into the world.”
Stressing the expansionary role China is taking in the digital sphere, she explained how companies like Apple and Google have adjusted their services according to Chinese censorship standards, and how these standards are creeping beyond China through apps such as TikTok.
“Nobody should have to change their human rights depending on where they are. Universal rights should be protected everywhere,” she said, stressing that companies based in democracies must not be let off when they are found to have aided in the oppression of human rights by using the excuse of having followed local laws.
Diego Naranjo, Head of Policy at European Digital Rights (EDRi), agreed with Glacier Kwong’s description of the human rights situation online.
“In Europe, large reactions were sparked in 2019 by the use of facial recognition by the authorities in Hong Kong to quell protestors, but similar systems have been implemented in France, for example, without causing much outrage.”
He stressed that the presence of biometric tracking in public spaces not only risks violating the privacy and data protection rights of the people using these spaces, but they also spill over to threatening other rights such as freedom of assembly and expression when people can be scanned during a protest as has happened in Hong Kong.
Additionally, he raised the issue of what he called the “Digital Stockholm Syndrome”, where companies like Facebook and Google create de facto monopolies where people have no choice but to use their services (and shed personal data while doing so) whether they want to or not.
“Theoretically someone could start a new ‘YouTube’, but in practice, it is impossible since there is no well-functioning digital market. In a well-functioning market, there would be alternative companies where consumers could choose according to for example data protection standards,” he explained, stressing the need to address problems with enforcement of data protection and competition regulations.
Moderator Karen Melchior raised the importance of narrow and well-defined legislation which clearly outlines the scope where user data may be used without leaving the full interpretation to the companies, as often happens today. She also brought up the importance of creating legislation robust enough for the worst offenders, rather than assuming benevolence from governments and other actors. This is particularly relevant since pioneering legislation is often copied by other countries.
Glacier Kwong agreed, highlighting the need for creating more balance of power between consumers and companies.
“We have to acknowledge that these companies have as much power as many governments, and they can analyse individuals and behaviours in a very far-reaching way. We need to find a balanced regulatory solution which balances profit and individual rights, and where both companies and individuals can thrive,” she concluded.
The second part of the policy lab consisted of internal discussions among the participating policy-makers and experts on the way forward for liberals, highlighting the need for digital literacy education and encouraging sustainable business models online. This event was the first instalment in a series of policy labs to gather the expertise of the liberal family and work towards laying the liberal policy foundations in the field of digitalisation and human rights.
