Internet Access as A Global Human Right: A Response to A Pandemic That Could Eradicate the Most Fundamental Human Rights

Although the United Nations General Assembly passed a non-binding Resolution “declar[ing] internet access a human right” in 2016[1], billions still live in the dark - removed from connectivity, educational tools, and substantial government resources.  Despite the internet being a leading source of human capital, “internet penetration rates only just surpassed the 50% threshold globally.”[2]  The low internet penetration rates are primarily because the UN General Assembly Resolution does not implement harsh penalties on governments that do not provide access to the internet as a matter of right.[3]  Therefore, states are disincentivized from enforcing internet access as a mandatory right for citizens.[4]

The United Nations’ declaration of the internet as a fundamental human right predated the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19).  The emergence of more extensive barriers resulting from COVID-19 has transitioned our perception of the internet from a helpful tool to a mandatory right that must be enforced.

Before COVID-19, the internet was instrumental as a source of connectivity and one of several methods for enforcing international human rights with heightened efficacy.  The International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights (ICCPR) requires the 173 countries[5] that have ratified the treaty to provide for “the right to freedom of expression . . . includ[ing] freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds . . . through any other media of his choice.”[6]  The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) obligates the 171[7] contracting states to recognize the right to equal access to work.[8]  The ICESCR[9] and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)[10], ratified by 193 countries[11], compel signing countries to enforce the right to education.  The internet allowed those rights to be enforced more effectively, giving citizens access to different audiences upon which to express ideas and different mediums to achieve employment and education opportunities.[12]

COVID-19 has transitioned the role of the internet to one of an essential nature, underscoring the need for state intervention in creating an infrastructure supporting internet access without discrimination.  Many international rights have been fundamentally limited by social distancing and quarantine measures.[13]  Mandatory quarantine measures and social distancing policies implicate the UDHR’s right to “freedom of peaceful assembly and association.”[14]  Restrictions on travel implicate the ICCPR’s liberty of movement provision.[15]  Closed institutions of worship and prayer implicate the ICCPR’s provision related to freedom to manifest religious beliefs.[16] 

Additionally, COVID-19 has elevated the relevance of the internet in accomplishing the UDHR’s right to “receive . . . information and ideas through any media”[17] because digital technologies may provide the sole source of information to “learn more about the virus, accelerate the search for a vaccine and track the development of the pandemic.”[18]

In the interests of public order, international security, and safety, certain rights have been curtailed to prevent the spread of COVID-19.  While shutdowns and restrictions might limit such rights, lack of access to the internet would essentially eradicate the most fundamental human rights for the duration of the pandemic.  Allowing the infringement of such rights would constitute a violation of established treaty law. 

Several countries have recently enacted laws and declarations to ensure internet accessibility, demonstrating that the capacity for internet access is much more than a mere possibility.  Chile and Argentina have issued laws and decrees deeming the internet a “public service” during pandemic-related lockdowns.[19]  This summer, the Colombian legislature passed a law declaring internet access an essential public service, with President Duque comparing the importance of internet access to that of water, gas, and electricity.[20]  Colombia has proceeded with concrete measures to improve and increase connectivity rates by working with operators and ensuring that they do not discontinue service during a crisis.[21]  Additionally, operators have designated certain web addresses related to government services, healthcare, and education as free to browse, created financial safeguards for operators in more rural areas, and enforced other policies to ensure access.[22]

By taking steps to enforce, rather than simply declare, the internet as an essential public service, states will ensure that they can prioritize public safety while not simultaneously violating the most fundamental international human rights that have existed as the bedrock of treaties for decades.

Danielle Cepelewicz and Maura McKeon are staff members of Fordham International Law Journal Volume XLV.

This is a student blog post and in no way represents the views of the Fordham International Law Journal.
—

[1] See Jack Barry, COVID-19 Exposes Why Access to the Internet is a Human Right, OpenGlobalRights (May 26, 2020), https://www.openglobalrights.org/covid-19-exposes-why-access-to-internet-is-human-right/.

[2] See id.

[3] See id.

[4] See id.

[5] Status of Ratification Interactive Dashboard: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, https://indicators.ohchr.org/, (Aug. 20, 2020).

[6] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 19(2), opened for signature Dec, 16, 1966, 999 U.N.T.S. 171 (entered into force Mar. 23, 1976). [hereinafter “ICCPR”].

[7] See Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, supra note 5.

[8] International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art. 6(1). opened for signature Dec, 16, 1966, U.N.T.S. 3 (entered into force Jan. 3, 1976).  [hereinafter “ICESCR”].

[9] See ICESCR Supra note 8, at art. 13(1).

[10] See Universal Declaration on Human Rights, U.N.Doc.A/810, art.26(1) (Dec. 10, 1948), [hereinafter “UDHR”].

[11] See Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, supra note 5.

[12] See Why the Government Should Not Regulate Content Moderation of Social Media, Cato Institute (April 9, 2019), https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/why-government-should-not-regulate-content-moderation-social-media#the-presumption-against-public-regulation-of-social-media.

[13] See Human Rights Dimensions of Covid-19 Response, Human Rights Watch (March 19, 2020), https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/03/19/human-rights-dimensions-covid-19-response.

[14] See UDHR supra note 10, art. 20(1).

[15] See ICCPR supra note 6, art. 12(1).

[16] See ICCPR supra note 6, art. 18(1), 18(3).

[17] See UDHR supra note 10, art. 19.

[18] See COVID-19 Crisis Accentuating the Need to Bridge Digital Divides, OECD (Nov. 27, 2020), https://www.oecd.org/newsroom/covid-19-crisis-accentuating-the-need-to-bridge-digital-divides.htm.

[19] See Luxury to essential: Latam boosts internet access in pandemic, Thomas Reuters Foundation News (Aug. 24, 2021), https://news.trust.org/item/20210824085952-m9yfs (“Peru, Brazil and Argentina are all mulling laws that would make the internet an essential public service, according to World Bank tech expert Doyle Gallegos.”).

[20] See President Iván Duque and Karen Abudinen, ICT Minister, enacted the Internet Law as an essential and universal public service, bnamericas (July 30, 2021),

https://www.bnamericas.com/en/news/president-ivan-duque-and-karen-abudinen-ict-minister-enacted-the-internet-law-as-an-essential-and-universal-public-service.

[21] See id.

[22] See id.