The United Nations has reached a consensus on a treaty aimed at addressing cybercrime, marking the organization’s first foray into this area despite significant pushback from human rights advocates.
After three years of deliberation and a final two-week negotiation in New York, the United Nations Convention Against Cybercrime was unanimously approved and will now be presented to the General Assembly for formal ratification.
“I consider the documents … adopted. Thank you very much, bravo to all!” announced Algerian diplomat Faouzia Boumaiza Mebarki, who chaired the treaty’s drafting committee, to applause from the assembly.
The treaty aims to enhance the global fight against cybercrime, particularly in areas such as child sexual abuse imagery and money laundering. South Africa’s delegate praised the treaty as a “landmark convention,” emphasizing that the “provisions of technical assistance and capacity building offer much needed support to countries with less developed cyber infrastructures.”
However, critics argue that the treaty’s broad scope could turn it into a global “surveillance” tool, potentially leading to repression. Deborah Brown of Human Rights Watch warned that the treaty could create an “unprecedented multilateral tool for surveillance” and described it as “a disaster for human rights and a dark moment for the UN.”
She added, “This treaty is effectively a legal instrument of repression. It can be used to crack down on journalists, activists, LGBT people, free thinkers, and others across borders.”
Nick Ashton-Hart, leading the Cybersecurity Tech Accord’s delegation, expressed disappointment, remarking that the committee “adopted a convention without addressing many of the major flaws identified by civil society, the private sector, or even the U.N.’s own human rights body.”
He warned, “Wherever it is implemented the Convention will be harmful to the digital environment generally and human rights in particular,” urging nations not to endorse or implement it.
On the other hand, some countries argue that the treaty incorporates too many human rights protections. Russia criticized the treaty for being “oversaturated with human rights safeguards” and accused other nations of advancing “narrow self-serving goals under the banner of democratic values.”
