
Shiny Things, via Wikimedia Commons
Civil society organisations around the globe have written to the World Bank and their Identification for Development Initiative (ID4D), raising concerns about the rollout of digital ID globally.
Shiny Things, via Wikimedia Commons
We, the undersigned civil society organizations and individuals, urge the World Bank and other international organizations to take immediate steps to cease activities that promote harmful models of digital identification systems (digital ID).
The signatories of this letter are located in different countries, work with diverse communities, and bring a wide range of expertise. Among this group, there are many shared concerns and similar experiences documenting the harmful impacts associated with digital ID. Many new or upgraded systems are arbitrarily de-linked from legal status, use digitized biometric data, and rely on a ‘single source of truth’ model in conjunction with multiple public and private services. It is well-documented that these digital ID systems raise human rights concerns. These will affect every person and community, and should be a matter of broad public concern.
Mounting evidence collected by civil society organizations and independent researchers and experts establishes that digital ID systems regularly have a harmful impact on human rights. Researchers at NYU Law School highlighted these findings in a recent report on how the World Bank and its Identification for Development (ID4D) Initiative support and fund a development agenda around digital ID. Although ID4D has shown a willingness to engage with civil society, this dialogue has not led to meaningful changes in policy or practice. Critically, compelling evidence from countries such as India and the Dominican Republic has not triggered adjustments in the Bank’s approach to supporting national governments that are building or upgrading digital ID systems. The World Bank continues funding the rollout of these programs, as in the Philippines, with new systems on the horizon, as in Mexico.
Both international organizations and industry actors, alongside the national governments deploying them, are promoting the rapid proliferation of such systems, while consistently disregarding the chronic underinvestment in context-based baseline studies, in cost-benefit analyses that cover the costs of potential human rights harms, or in comprehensive human rights due diligence process to include impact assessment. Civil society and independent experts are given little opportunity to raise necessary critiques, design adequate safeguards, and propose alternative means of solving challenges. This is at a time when many governments are closing civic space and intentionally silencing critical voices, both online and offline, and increasingly using digital surveillance as part of a repressive toolkit. It is therefore of grave concern that powerful actors like the World Bank, other international organizations, and private sector technology companies support the uptake of systems that enable surveillance, exclusion, and discrimination against vulnerable and marginalized communities.
In order to break this harmful cycle, we call on the World Bank and its donors to take the following actions:
These recommendations are directed chiefly to the World Bank due to the significant and influential role that it has played in promoting digital ID systems. However, most of these recommendations apply equally to UN bodies; private foundations such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Omidyar Network; donors such as the United Kingdom, Australia, and France; and the private sector. All of these actors have played a key role in promoting digital ID systems and can make a meaningful contribution to change.
For any of these processes to work, however, they must come with real consequences. While safeguards are necessary, there may simply be environments where human rights risks are too high, or where evidence-based policymaking, civil society engagement, rule of law, and rights-based assessments are simply not possible. In such cases, the Bank and other funders should heed the evidence and decline to support new or upgraded digital ID systems. For too long, the emphasis has been on the development promises of digital ID systems, but it is past time to reckon with their vast potential for abuse and exploitation.
Signatories
Privacy International
Digital Welfare State and Human Rights Project, Center for Human Rights and Global Justice (NYU Law)
Access Now
Dr Eve Hayes de Kalaf, Research Fellow, Institute of Commonwealth Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London.
Unwanted Witness
Anna Aloys Henga - Legal and Human Rights Centre
Jean Drèze, Visiting Professor, Department of Economics, Ranchi University
Paradigm Initiative
Initiative for Social and Economic Rights (ISER)
Reetika Khera, Professor (Economics), Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
Philip Alston, John Norton Pomeroy Professor of Law, New York University School of Law
Haki na Sheria Initiative
Ria Singh Sawhney, Lawyer and Researcher
Suman Gupta, Professor of Literature and Cultural History, The Open University UK
Global Data Justice Project, Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology and Society (TILT), Tilburg University
Temple University Institute for Law, Innovation & Technology (iLIT)
Jake Okechukwu Effoduh, Chief Counsel, Africa-Canada AI & Data Innovation Consortium (ACADIC), York University
Black Sash
Richard Banégas, Professor of Political Science at Sciences Po Paris, Co-Director of the Social Life of Identity Documents in Africa
Spaces for Change
Keren Weitzberg, Senior Lecturer, School of Politics and International Relations, Queen Mary University London
Marielle Debos, Associate Professor in Political Science, University of Paris Nanterre
Sunita Sheel, Heal, Ethics and Law Institute of FMES
Vidhayak Trust, Pune, Maharashtra
Jaap van der Straaten, CEO of the Civil Registration Centre for Development—CRC4D
Health Equity and Policy Initiative (HEAPI)
Internet Freedom Foundation
Asociación de Tecnología, Educación, Desarrollo, Investigación y Comunicación (TEDIC)
Digital Rights Foundation
Digital Empowerment Foundation
Surveillance, Tech & Immigration Policing Project at the Immigrant Defense Project
Privacy Mode
Yesha Tshering Paul, The Centre for Internet and Society
Nanjala Nyabola, Independent writer and researcher
Foundation for Media Alternatives
Red en Defensa de los Derechos Digitales (R3D)
Derechos Digitales
SMEX
Amanda Hammar, Professor of African Studies, University of Copenhagen
Shruti Trikanad, The Centre for Internet & Society
Dr Margie Cheesman, King’s College London
Silvia Masiero, Associate Professor, University of Oslo
Francesca Feruglio, International Network for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Article 21 Trust
Nachiket Udupa
Asociación por los Derechos Civiles (ADC)
Rethink Aadhaar
Sonal Raghuvanshi, Researcher, Centre for Financial Accountability
Swati Narayan, Activist, Right to Food Campaign, India
Nikhil Pahwa
Rajendran Narayanan, Assistant Professor, Azim Premji University
Centre for Financial Accountability India
Tarek Alghorani - Journalist & human rights defender
Kehinde Adegboyega, Human Rights Journalists Network Nigeria
Srinivas Kodali
Santosh Sigdel, Chairperson, Digital Rights Nepal
Digital Rights Nepal
Srikanth Lakshmanan, CashlessConsumer
Usuarios Digitales
UBUNTEAM
Arzak Khan Innovation For Change (I4C)
Tech for Good Asia
comun.al, Laboratorio de resiliencia digital
Harry Sufehmi, Masyarakat Anti Fitnah Indonesia (MAFINDO)
Joshua Wise
JCA-NET(Japan)
Body & Data, Nepal
Yasah Musa,The Nubian Rights Forum
Taiwan Association for Human Rights (TAHR)
Statewatch
Resurj
Data4Revolution
Phil Booth, Coordinator, medConfidential (National Coordinator, NO2ID, 2004-2011)