In search of human rights in multilateral cybersecurity dialogues

The missing piece in human-centric approaches to cybernorms implementation: the role of civil society

“…Discussions centred on regime interests are more inclined to be affected and shaped by geopolitical relationshipsor the 'nation state's security'at any given time for example, than the interests of citizens and users (Dunn Cavelty 2012). Privileging the nation state and its interests in cyber policy discussions, including through the use of military discourse such as 'war', 'arms' and 'deterrence'; the inclusion of cyber operations in military strategy, doctrines and operations; and the increased investment in cybercapacities to gain strategic advantage have been termed by some as the 'militarisation of cyberspace', challenging a human-centric approach (Liaropoulos 2015;Pytlak 2020), particularly because, and as is shown in more detail below, the security objectives of the state may not coincide with the security of individual citizens (Dunn Cavelty 2012). For example, an emphasis on national security denotes that the strategic and military aspects of cyberspace are increasingly resourced, resulting in the development of military assets, like the establishment of cyber commands.…”

“…References and commitments to human rights and to the importance of inclusive processes by member states exist in a range of multilateral and multistakeholder forums, including the Freedom Online Coalition (2020), the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (2019), and within the First Committee of the UN General Assembly (see Pytlak 2020), meetings of the Open-Ended Working Group on ICTs (see Reaching Critical Will 2020), and Arria formula meetings of the UN Security Council (see Brown 2020). In addition, a number of national cybersecurity strategies make reference to the importance of implementing and respecting human rights (Global Partners Digital 2020a).…”