United Nations Adopts Cybercrime Treaty After Three Years Of Negotiation

The United Nations has approved a new cybercrime treaty, the first treaty of such nature to be adopted within the body. After three years of negotiations, UN member states approved the United Nations Convention Against Cybercrime by consensus on Thursday. The treaty will now be submitted to the General Assembly for formal adoption.

“I consider the documents… adopted. Thank you very much, bravo to all!” expressed Algerian diplomat Faouzia Boumaiza Mebarki, chairwoman of the treaty drafting committee, to member applause. However, the move has faced fierce criticism from human rights activists and tech firms who warn of potential surveillance risks from governments.

Lack of Safeguards in UN Cybercrime Treaty

The new treaty is aimed at preventing and combating cybercrime more efficiently and effectively, particularly regarding child sexual abuse imagery and money laundering. However, critics argue that the treaty’s broad scope and lack of human rights safeguards could facilitate government repression.

Deborah Brown of Human Rights Watch (HRW) called it an ‘unprecedented multilateral tool for surveillance’ that will be a ‘disaster for human rights and a dark moment for the UN.’

The treaty’s approval has also sparked a mixed reaction from countries, with some complaining that it includes too many human rights safeguards. While Russia, had supported the drafting process of the law, the nation had also complained that the treaty had become “oversaturated with human rights safeguards.” The nation of Iran had unsuccessfully requested for the deletion of several clauses with “inherent flaws” within the cybercrime treaty. The treaty had been approved by consensus, with 102 countries voting against Iran’s request, 23 in favor and 26 absences.

The treaty’s title defines cybercrime to include any crime committed by using Information and Communications Technology systems,” said Deborah Brown of Human Rights Watch. She added, “As a result, when governments pass domestic laws that criminalize any activity that uses the Internet in any way, they can point to this treaty to justify the enforcement of repressive laws.

The treaty also requires governments to assist in the investigation of crimes deemed as serious under national law – meaning: offenses with a sentence of four years or more. This could include behaviors protected under international human rights law, such as same-sex conduct, criticizing one’s government, or being a whistleblower.

“The lack of human rights safeguards is disturbing and should worry us all,” Brown said. “The current draft treaty defers to domestic law to provide for human-rights safeguards, which means that people are subject to the laws of individual countries, instead of benefiting from key human rights standards under international law,” she added.

Risks to Children’s Rights

The treaty attempts to address child sexual abuse material, but critics argue it could inadvertently criminalize the consensual conduct of children in similar-age relationships, contrary to guidance from the UN’s Committee on the Rights of the Child.

It would also put at risk the work of human rights organizations that document abuses of children’s rights and that may have access to such material as part of their investigations,” Brown said.

Calls for Rejection

The committee drafting the treaty was set up despite opposition from US and European governments, following the initial move by Russia in 2017. “This treaty is effectively a legal instrument of repression,” Brown said. She cautioned, “It can be used to crack down on journalists, activists, LGBT people, free thinkers, and others across borders.”

Nick Ashton-Hart, representing the Cybersecurity Tech Accord delegation, which includes Microsoft and Meta, called for nations not to sign or implement the treaty, stating that it would be ‘harmful to the digital environment generally and human rights in particular.’ Nick felt that the UN committee adopted a convention without addressing major flaws identified by civil society, the private sector, and those of the UN’s own human rights body.

These human rights groups and technology companies in opposition to the cybercrime treaty, are urging UN member states to reject the current version of the cybercrime treaty, warning that it could facilitate transnational repression and undermine fundamental freedoms.