Sara Kurfeß, Unplash>
29 April 2022
Concerns regarding the human rights impact of business conduct in the technology sector are not new – whether related to the dissemination of illegal content via online platforms, data collection or online surveillance.
While there is agreement about the need to better regulate technology company conduct, it remains essential to place international human rights law (IHRL) at the centre of regulatory and policy frameworks.
The United Nations (UN) Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) provide important guidance to policymakers on ensuring that their regulatory efforts align with a human rights-based approach and IHRL.
A new Research Brief by the Geneva Academy and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) B-Tech project on Regulating Business Conduct in the Technology Sector: Gaps and Ways Forward in Applying the UNGPs depicts the prominent gaps in regulatory approaches to business conduct in the technology sector with regard to the UNGPs. Further, the research brief suggests how such alignment could be improved and sketches ongoing conceptual work by the OHCHR B-Tech project on engaging with policymakers for enhanced uptake of the UNGPs in technology regulation.
Written by our Senior Research Fellow Dr Ana Beduschi and by Dr Isabel Ebert, Adviser to the OHCHR B-Tech Project and Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Business Ethics at the University of St. Gallen, it draws on our research project on disruptive technologies and rights-based resilience – funded by the Geneva Science-Policy Interface and conducted in partnership with OHCHR B-Tech Project.
Emmanuel Ikwuegbu, Unplash>
The publication starts by identifying the prominent gaps in UNGPs' alignment in regulatory efforts and their subsequent risks for human rights.
‘Our research highlights that existing regulatory efforts on technology company conduct show a mixed picture with regards to their alignment with the UNGPs’ underlines Dr Beduschi.
Gaps include a narrow view of human rights, the inconsistent use of human rights due diligence terminology, a narrow scope on a tier in the value chain, a lack of accompanying measures and enforcement mechanisms, a prescriptive list of non-permissible activities or a focus on protected artifacts, the absence of a ‘balancing test’, and the lack of clear provisions for access to remedy.
Glen Carrie, Unplash
Akshar Dave, Unplash
The Research Brief proposes concrete recommendations on how regulatory processes could be better aligned with the UNGPs. Further, the research brief presents ongoing work by the OHCHR B-Tech Project in developing a guidance tool to inform policymakers on the policy and design choices when regulating technology company conduct in a manner which is consistent with the UNGPs.
‘A UNGPs-based approach to regulation ensures the development of a coherent regulatory landscape that is aligned with international human rights standards. This is key to avoid negative human rights impacts related to technology company conduct’ underlines Dr Ebert.
The publication also sketches three essential building blocks – or phases – for policymakers when regulating technology company conduct:
‘A strong stakeholder engagement along all stages of the regulatory development process is vital to the success of the process. Our cooperation with the Geneva Academy has supported our project in bringing this important message across to key stakeholders’ says Lene Wendland, Chief of Business and Human Rights at OHCHR.
‘As highlighted by the recent adoption of the EU Digital Services Act, many governments are currently developing regulations on this issue. This publication will be of use to policy-makers working on such regulations, both regarding their content but also regarding the process leading to their adoption’ explains Felix Kirchmeier, Manager of Policy Studies at the Geneva Academy.
From 14 to 20 November, flags with the Geneva Academy’s logo will be flying on the Mont-Blanc Bridge on the occasion of our 15th anniversary.
Our new Briefing The Universality of Human Rights: Developing Narratives to Overcome Polarization zooms into the main challenges that the idea of universality faces nowadays and seeks to offer some elements to devise a more consequential and effective narrative of human rights universality to overcome these challenges.
This IHL Talk will explore the practices, opportunities and challenges stemming from the use of open-source information to document, investigate and prosecute international crimes and serious human rights violations.
Francisco Proner / Farpa/ CIDH
This online short course aims at presenting the institutions and procedures in charge of the implementation of international human rights law.
This online short course discusses the extent to which states may limit and/or derogate from their international human rights obligations in order to prevent and counter-terrorism and thus protect persons under their jurisdiction.
This research aims at taking stock of and contributing to a better understanding of the above-mentioned challenges to the principle of universality of human rights while also questioning their validity. It will identify relevant political and legal arguments and develop counter-narratives that could be instrumental to dealing with and/or overcoming the polarization of negotiations processes at the multilateral level.
The Geneva Human Rights Platform contributes to this review process by providing expert input via different avenues, by facilitating dialogue on the review among various stakeholders, as well as by accompanying the development of a follow-up resolution to 68/268 in New York and in Geneva.