Journalism Campaign Group Warns UN Cybercrime Treaty Could Expand Surveillance Powers

The United Nations headquarters building is pictured in New York on July 13, 2023. (Daniel Slim/AFP via Getty Images)

A global journalism campaign claims that an upcoming United Nations global cybercrime treaty will give authorities sweeping surveillance powers.

On Aug. 6, the International Press Institute (IPI), a group of media professionals advocating for global press freedom, wrote that a new global convention backed by Russia, China, and others could usher in a new era of “transnational surveillance and repression.”

Since May 2021, UN member states have been negotiating an international treaty on countering cybercrime. The UN body tasked with developing the treaty, the Ad Hoc Committee, will reach an agreement on the final text of the Convention on Aug. 9.

If adopted and finalized this week, it would be the first binding UN instrument on a cyber issue.

The treaty, initially proposed by Russia in 2017, is an international effort to fight cybercrime by using existing global, regional, and national tools and efforts to tackle the issue.

However, IPI said that it actually puts “journalists and civil society at even greater risk around the world.”

It added that it reflects a global trend of governments using laws and regulations billed as combating “cybercrime” to censor online expression and expand state surveillance.

“While purportedly aimed at combating cybercrime, the treaty instead vastly expands states’ spying and investigatory powers, including across borders, while hollowing out existing international human rights treaties and obligations that provide essential protections for journalists to do their jobs freely and safely,” it wrote.

It added that governments are developing overly broad and vague cybercrime laws that go far beyond their core remit under the guise of tackling legitimate cybercrime, such as malicious hacking and ransomware attacks.

“Instead, these laws have become powerful tools for online censorship and surveillance, used to silence and punish journalists, activists, researchers and other public watchdogs,” added IPI.

It said that the U.S. and the EU appear poised to sign the treaty “despite these critical flaws.”

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a nonprofit organization defending civil liberties in the digital world, said that security researchers and investigative journalists’ rights are “perilously unprotected” under the agreement.

EFF said that Article 11 (misuse of devices) of the treaty may inadvertently criminalize security research and investigative journalism.

“It may punish even making or using tools for research purposes if the research, such as security testing, is considered to fall under one of the other crimes,” it added.

Cybercrime

According to the UN, cybercrime is an evolving form of transnational crime, and working to address it supports the achievement of their Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

It said that a legally binding international treaty to counter the threat is needed as cybercrime is a “multi-trillion-dollar business.”

“Drugs and weapons are being bought on the ‘dark web,’ fraudsters are fleecing members of the public in elaborate online scams, and terrorists are grooming supporters and recruiting fighters,” it said.

According to the United Nations University, which focuses on global development and policy research, the treaty will seek to criminalize “a range of core cyber-dependent crimes, and a limited number of cyber-enabled crimes.”

It also obligates “states to develop digital investigation and enforcement capabilities, and to apply these new powers to other crimes conducted using computer networks.”

In February, Raman Jit Singh Chima, the Senior International Counsel and Asia Pacific Policy Director for Access Now, a nongovernment entity part of the treaty negotiations, explained some of his organization’s concerns. He told the UN podcast “The Lid is On” that political crimes can be included if the treaty’s scope is too broad.

“For example, if someone makes a comment about a head of government, or a head of state, that might end up being penalized under the cybercrime law,” he said.

“When it comes to law enforcement agencies cooperating on this treaty, we need to put strong human rights standards in place because that provides trust and confidence in the process,” he added.

The Epoch Times reached out to the UN for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.