The regulation of encryption often fails to meet freedom …

The regulation of encryption often fails to meet freedom of expression standards in two leading respects. First, restrictions have generally not been shown to be necessary to meet a particular legitimate interest. This is especially the case given the breadth and depth of other tools, such as traditional policing and intelligence and transnational cooperation, that may already provide substantial information for specific law enforcement or other legitimate purposes. Second, they disproportionately impact the rights to freedom of opinion and expression enjoyed by targeted persons or the general population. […] Outright prohibitions on the individual use of encryption technology disproportionately restrict the freedom of expression, because they deprive all online users in a particular jurisdiction of the right to carve out private space for opinion and expression, without any particular claim of the use of encryption for unlawful ends. […]

States should promote strong encryption and anonymity. National laws should recognize that individuals are free to protect the privacy of their digital communications by using encryption technology and tools that allow anonymity online. Legislation and regulations protecting human rights defenders and journalists should also include provisions enabling access and providing support to use the technologies to secure their communications.

Report of the Special
Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of
opinion and expression, David Kaye, 22 May 2015

(View on

You may also like...