Human rights (intersection with emerging technology)

From Blindside

1 What are they?
2 Impact & Maturity assessment
3 Information Assurance issues
4 Timescale
5 Examples
6 Comments (attributed)
7 Organisations
8 Documents & research papers
9 Experts (academic, practitioner)

[edit] What are they?

Human rights are enshrined in international and UK laws intended to define and protect universal rights and freedoms and principles of fairness and equality. They merit inclusion in a discussion of emerging technology because they are a source of "lines in the sand" which emerging technologies routinely cross. This is particularly the case where emerging technologies are intrusive or discriminatory, or affect people's dignity or entitlement to a private life.

[edit] Impact & Maturity assessment

Both technology and IT security can be used to protect or threaten human rights--often the same tools or procedures can be used for either end. A typical example would be the human rights effects surrounding e-Voting, where increase in access to a service for many is in apparent conflict with the potential for abuse. Human rights issues related to technology are normally identified very quickly and follow a pattern that all too often ends in clearly identified political positions in full-scale conflict with each other. Hence this assessment focuses on the politics of human rights and technology.

We estimate the Impact Level at 3, due to the apparently unresolvable conflict between those who feel that identity is personal property inviolate and those who feel it is state-owned and controlled. Both those positions are at the far end of a spectrum of attitudes towards identity and its role in the state and its importance to all other human rights.

Champions of the position that the state should be prevented from, or severely limited in, collecting, storing and deciding how to use identity information are arguing loudly and often eloquently about the threat to human rights posed by large-scale IT projects proposed and being implemented by UK government. Some of these champions are writing here at Blindside. However, their political power is small at present, and their opinions are not shared by a majority of the public. Nonetheless, this issue is highly likely to be decided after implementation in the court system, and these champions are creating a body of work that could possibly lead a court to impose limitations on data collection and usage post implementation.

Receiving less attention at the moment from human rights campaigners are other technologies that are or potentially could impinge on human rights. Should political activism begin in these areas, the current generation of judges may well sympathize with rights-based arguments regarding CCTV, location-based services, univeral access issues, etc. Political activists may well be joined by specific groups regarding specific technologies, such as groups concerned with disabilities demanding that technology be used to provide access to information and/or the real world.

The groups exist in abundance, but they are not particularly strong, nor are they well-networked or actively co-operating at present. Hence, we assign this a Maturity Level of 2.

[edit] Information Assurance issues

Answer: what seem to be the likely information assurance issues of the emerging technology under discussion

[edit] Timescale

Human rights are defined in internation and UK law, but the interpretation of these definitions seems to shift in practice.

[edit] Examples

Surveillance Tracking staff emails is judged to be illegal and intrusive: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1652792.ece

[edit] Comments (attributed)

“The Internet should promote free speech, not restrict it. We have to guard against the creation of two Internets -- one for expression and one for repression,” says Larry Cox, Executive Director of Amnesty International USA (AIUSA)