Derechos Digitales

Region of Operation

Website

Social protection programmes

Our campaign

How EdTech is turning schools into mass surveillance spaces.

Educational spaces are increasingly being subjected to intrusive monitoring, and the education technologies (EdTech) being deployed is being used as a form of surveillance that undermines students’ privacy and human rights.

This intrusion into students’ privacy is mainly due to the inescapable presence of these technologies, which facilitate the creation of detailed records documenting students’ movements, interactions, and daily schedules. While those promoting EdTech may claim that these tools enhance safety, efficiency, and content delivery, the implications are far-reaching. They can expose intimate aspects of a student’s life, including their sexual orientation, health status, and religious preferences.

In essence, they transform educational institutions into environments where students are under constant surveillance, much like individuals in “high security” settings, such as prisons. Their every move is meticulously recorded and categorized, producing a chilling effect on their natural reactions and behaviour.

The alarm is being raised. Among others, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education calling out the adverse impacts of state surveillance facilitated by EdTech, including the intrusive nature of technologies, data collection and role of commercial entities.

In a nutshell, the securitisation of educational spaces undermines students’ learning, growth, and ability to exercise their basic human rights.

What is EdTech? Find out more on our Learn page

What is PI doing?

PI has been closely monitoring this trend, especially through the increasing use of EdTech.

Our research exposes significant gaps in compliance with human rights standards in the deployment of these technologies in educational settings.

We advocate at both national and international levels, urging authorities to address these concerns and take action to protect human rights.

Theory of Change

Off

Learn more

Students shouldn’t have to trade their right to privacy in order to access their right to education.

Derechos Digitales publish a report on ID systems and social protection in Venezuela and Bolivia

staff — Tue, 13 Apr 2021 11:14:17 +0000

Language English

This article was written by Jamila Venturini from Derechos Digitales. The original version (in Spanish) is available here.

While at the international level there is a growing demand to ban the use of surveillance technologies until rigorous human rights standards are achieved, in Latin America we observe a new and silent tendency to acquire and use such systems to control access to social protection, i.e., to policies developed to reduce poverty, social vulnerability and exclusion.

Our region - the most unequal in the world - has become an international example in recent decades in the implementation of social protection programmes. However, the increase in the conditions imposed for effective access to benefits, both explicit and implicit, undermines the purpose of protecting and guaranteeing basic rights. If we add technological mediation through biometric systems, such as facial recognition, fingerprint collection, web applications or unified digital records, there is a risk of deepening the inequalities that the social protection programmes seek to eradicate in the first place.

The UN special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights has identified some uses of technologies in welfare systems around the world. The list includes identity verification, assessment of eligibility criteria, calculation and payment of social benefits, fraud prevention and detection, risk and needs classification, as well as communication between authorities and recipients of social protection policies.

Several of these uses have already materialised in Latin America. In Venezuela, biometric systems have been implemented to control the purchase of basic goods, resulting in several complaints of discrimination against foreigners and, especially, transgender people. In addition to pre-existing discrimination against historically vulnerable populations, this type of initiative implies the exercise of a differentiated surveillance, which aggravates the lack of protection of those most vulnerable and, therefore, those who are most dependent on state support.

Similar measures have been implemented in other countries in the region and include the use of facial recognition to control access to special privileges in the transportation systems of different cities in Brazil and the entrance to educational institutions; similar proposals have been presented in the framework of the return to in-person teaching in Chile. In the context of the global COVID-19 pandemic, in El Salvador and Peru, facial recognition systems have been used to control potential fraud in school examinations undertaken remotely, a particularly delicate situation in light of the fact that those concerned are minors.

In the case of Bolivia, we observe how digitisation, often presented with the promise of greater efficiency in public management, is not only insufficient to solve structural problems of access to basic state services, but also creates additional pathways for new forms of discrimination. An exploratory analysis of the role of technologies in the delivery of economic assistance to the population in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic shows the various layers of complexity involved in such use.

Brazil and its emergency relief program is another clear example. The decision to use mobile applications to enable people to apply for aid resulted in increased difficulties in accessing benefits. Those most in need of support do not always have a device with an internet connection, a phone number or even an identification document. The proposed system did not consider the needs of the recipients. In this regard, Brazilian organizations raised concerns regarding the transparency and security guarantees offered by the application with respect to the data collected.

In addition, the implementation of technologies adds new layers and agents to the processing of personal data, and leads to an increase in vulnerabilities in terms of security and protection against misuse. The same is true for proposals calling for database integration and interoperability, single identity, automation and prediction. In our region these practices abound, either in pilot format or in proposals for action, often promoted by international financial institutions.

The publication "Identity systems and social protection in Venezuela and Bolivia: gender impacts and other inequalities" addresses some of these issues based on the analysis of cases in both countries, and warns about the implications of technological mediation in relations between the state and citizens. It also proposes a reflection on the impacts that surveillance technologies can have on access to social and economic rights, and on how digitisation can deepen inequality, especially when it involves access to data by private agents or algorithmic mediation through classification systems.

We consider these to be central points that need to be discussed. Even more so when the pandemic shows no signs of stopping in the region, and poverty and extreme poverty reach unprecedented levels.

Derechos Digitales' report can be accessed here.

Learn more

Poverty

Economic, social and cultural rights

Location

Venezuela

Our fight

Realise Our Rights to Live with Dignity

More about our partner

When Big Brother Pays Your Benefits

Our campaign

Open Letter to Facebook and Google

tech-admin — Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:49:02 +0000

Target Profile

Google

Facebook

Audiences and Purpose

Influence key stakeholders

Change

We campaign for solutions

We are building a global movement

Content

Advocacy

Summary

Privacy International is part of a 60+ coalition calling on Facebook and Google to provide equal and better transparency regarding political advertising on their platforms globally.

Media

ryul-davidson-PcyrQsX5f4w-unsplash.jpg

Key points

We believe it is necessary for both Google and Facebook to:

Accelerate the expansion of full transparency tools to all countries where you operate to ensure that the least favoured countries benefit from the same level of transparency as the most favoured countries
Develop, and make public, a plan of action setting out commitments and related timescales to roll out full transparency tools globally
Disclose the full array of criteria, both past and present, used to select countries qualifying for higher transparency standards

This letter is also available in Spanish.

Dear Mr. Zuckerberg and Mr. Pichai,

In the past few years, you have pioneered important transparency tools to help your platform users understand, learn about and contextualise the political advertising they see. We agree that advertiser verification processes and ad repositories are key safeguards against online manipulation and misinformation. However, we are saddened to observe that these benefits have not been equally distributed among your global user base.
Each platform operates fluctuating and often widely differing transparency standards for different countries. While some users benefit from seeing political advertising in an ad repository, others do not. Where some users are offered detailed information about a political ad, others are not. There are no legitimate or otherwise publicly disclosed reasons justifying this difference in treatment.
The combined effect of these inconsistent policies is to create a two-tiered user base within each platform, with a wide regulatory gap separating the transparency haves and have-nots. We first highlighted these problems in 2019. While some progress has been made since, we are disappointed to conclude that the transparency divide persists.
Online transparency should not be a privilege of the few, but the right of all. To that end, the changes we believe are necessary are as follows:

Accelerate the expansion of full transparency tools to all countries where you operate to ensure that the least favoured countries benefit from the same level of transparency as the most favoured countries
Develop, and make public, a plan of action setting out commitments and related timescales to roll out full transparency tools globally
Disclose the full array of criteria, both past and present, used to select countries qualifying for higher transparency standards

The above changes, which we believe to be fair and reasonable, are only a starting point to begin to correct the current platform-created inequality between users. By contrast, the benefits are conclusive: heightened transparency standards for millions of users worldwide, and increased legitimacy of online political advertising for the sake of fair and informed decision-making by voters.
We urge you to take responsibility as two of the most influential platforms in online political campaigning, and empower users and voters with heightened ads transparency.

Yours sincerely,

Access Now
Africa Freedom of Information Centre (AFIC)
Aliansi Jurnalis Independen/Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI)
Amnesty International
ApTI
Article 19
Artículo 19 México y Centroamérica
Asociación por los Derechos Civiles
Asociación para una Ciudadanía Participativa, ACI Participa
Associação Data Privacy Brasil de Pesquisa
Asociación para el Progreso de las Comunicaciones (APC)
Association for International Affairs (AMO) in Prague
Association pour le Developpement Integré et la Solidarité Interactive (ADISI-C)
Citizen D
Centre for Independent Journalism Malaysia (CIJ-M)
Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA)
Civil Liberties Union for Europe
Bytes for All (B4A)
Datos Protegidos
Defend Democracy
Dejusticia
Democracy Reporting International (DRI)
Derechos Digitales
Digital Rights Foundation
ELSAM
Electronic Frontier Finland
Electronic Frontier Norway
epicenter.works
EU Disinfo Lab
Fundación Acceso
Fundación Huaira de Quito-Ecuador
Fundación Internet Bolivia
Fundación Karisma
Freedom Forum
Free Media Movement (FMM)
Global Forum for Media Development
Global Witness
Hiperderecho
Homo Digitalis
Instituto Brasileiro de Defesa do Consumidor
InternetLab
Intervozes - Coletivo Brasil de Comunicação Social
IPANDETEC Centroamérica
Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL)
Laboratorio de Datos y Sociedad (DATYSOC)
Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA)
Media Institute of Southern Africa MISA- Zimbabwe
Media Matters for Democracy
Merit Legal Advocacy & Human Rights Initiative (MELAHRI)
OBSERVACOM
Paradigm Initiative (PIN)
Privacy International
R3D: Red en Defensa de los Derechos Digitales
SFLC.in
Stiftung Neue Verantwortung (SNV)
Sursiendo, Comunicación y Cultura Digital AC
TEDIC
The Tor Project
Unwanted Witness
Usuarios Digitales
Venezuela Inteligente
Who Targets Me
World Wide Web Foundation
Xnet

Repeating Image and Text

More about our partner

La Asociación por los Derechos Civiles

The Association for Civil Rights (ADC) is a non-governmental organisation based in Buenos Aires that promotes civil and social rights in Argentina and other Latin American countries. It was founded in 1995 with the aim of fostering a legal and institutional culture to guarantee fundamental rights, based on respect for the constitution and democratic values.

Country of Operation

Argentina

Region of Operation

Asociación por los Derechos Civiles

Website

Dejusticia

The Center for Law, Justice and Society (Dejusticia) is a Colombia-based NGO that works to strengthen the rule of law and promote human rights in Colombia and across the developing world. It produces research to contribute to action for social change, and carries out advocacy through campaigns, litigation, education and capacity-building.

Country of Operation

Region of Operation

Website

Dejusticia

Derechos Digitales

Country of Operation

Region of Operation

Website

Digital Rights Foundation

Digital Rights Foundation (DRF) is a research and advocacy NGO based in Pakistan that focuses on how Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) can support human rights, democratic processes and digital governance. It works towards a world where all people, and especially women, are able to safely exercise their right of expression.

Country of Operation

Pakistan

Region of Operation

Asia

Website

DRF

Fundación Karisma

Founded in 2003, Fundación Karisma is a civil society organisation dedicated to supporting and disseminating the good use of technologies in digital environments, social processes and public policies in Colombia and the region, with a human rights focus. It also undertakes legal and technological activism in coalitionwith local, regional and international partners.

Country of Operation

Region of Operation

Website

Fundación Karisma

Hiperderecho

Hiperderecho is a non-profit Peruvian organisation dedicated to facilitating public understanding and promoting respect for rights and freedoms in digital environments. It seeks to spread the liberating capacity of technology to develop or enhance digital spaces so that all Peruvians can exercise their rights and strengthen their citizenship.

Country of Operation

Peru

Region of Operation

Website

Hiperderecho

InternetLab

InternetLab is an independent research center that aims to foster academic debate around issues involving law and technology, especially internet policy. Our goal is to conduct interdisciplinary impactful research and promote dialogue among academics, professionals and policymakers. We follow an entrepreneurial nonprofit model, which embraces our pursuit of producing scholarly research in the manner and spirit of an academic think tank. As a nexus of expertise in technology, public policy and social sciences, our research agenda covers a wide range of topics, including privacy, freedom of speech, gender and technology.

Country of Operation

Brazil

Region of Operation

Website

InternetLab

Red en Defensa de los Derechos Digitales

The Red en Defensa de los Derechos Digitales (R3D) is a Mexican organisation dedicated to the defence of human rights in the digital environment. It uses various legal and communication tools for policy research, strategic litigation, and advocacy and campaigns, with particular attention to freedom of expression, privacy, and access to knowledge.

Country of Operation

Mexico

Region of Operation

Red en Defensa de los Derechos Digitales

Website

La Asociación de Tecnología, Educación, Desarrollo, Investigación, Comunicación (TEDIC)

La Asociación de Tecnología, Educación, Desarrollo, Investigación, Comunicación (TEDIC) is a Paraguayan non-governmental organisation that develops open civic technology, supported by its work in communications and alternative advocacy. It also promotes and defends digital rights in favour of a free Internet culture, with the aim of establishing a collaborative society where digital rights are exercised and respected.

Country of Operation

Paraguay

Region of Operation

Website

TEDIC

The Institute for Policy Research and Advocacy (ELSAM)

The Institute for Policy Research and Advocacy (ELSAM) is a civil society organisation that works to enhance the democratic political order in Indonesia by empowering civil society. Founded in 1993, it actively participates in efforts to promote human rights through policy and legal research, advocacy, and training.

Country of Operation

Indonesia

Region of Operation

Asia

Website

ELSAM

Unwanted Witness

Founded in 2012, Unwanted Witness is a Ugandan-based civil society organisation that seeks to create secure, uncensored online platforms for human rights activists. It aims to contribute to good governance through effective online activism, networking and capacity-building. It also advocates for the strengthening of mechanisms related to freedom of expression and accountability.

Country of Operation

Uganda

Region of Operation

Africa

Website

Unwanted Witness

Our campaign

PI is campaigning for 1) platforms to give all users heightened ad transparency and 2) for transparency into targeting and funding of ads to be meaningful.

The role of social media and search platforms in political campaigning and elections has come under scrutiny. Concerns range from the spread of disinformation, to profiling of users without their knowledge, to micro-targeting of users with tailored messages, to interference by foreign entities, and more. Significant attention has been paid to the transparency of political ads, and more broadly to the transparency of online ads.

Notably, in the lead up to the 2019 EU Parliamentary elections Facebook, Google, and Twitter, as well as the Interactive Advertising Bureau and others, agreed to take a series of steps to prevent online disinformation on their respective platforms. These measures are reflected in a self-regulatory Code of Practice on Disinformation and the companies provided the European Commission with monthly updates on their progress.

PI is campaigning for 1) platforms to give all users heightened ad transparency and 2) for transparency into targeting and funding of ads to be meaningful.

Learn more

Democratic engagement is increasingly mediated by digital technology, from campaigning to election results transmission. These technologies rely on collecting, storing, and analysing personal information to operate. They raise novel issues and challenges for all electoral stakeholders on how to protect our data from exploitation.

Podcast: Immunity Passports

caitlinb — Fri, 24 Jul 2020 05:05:17 +0000

Podcast: Immunity Passports

Peru's Covid-19 app still leaves more questions than answers

tech-admin — Thu, 11 Jun 2020 19:21:53 +0000

Peru's Covid-19 app still leaves more questions than answers tech-admin Thursday, June 11, 2020

It's been two months since the launch of "Perú en us manos", the mobile app promoted by the Peruvian government amidst the Covid-19 pandemic. Until now the app did not accomplish the ambitious goals it set out to.

On its first month the app had detected 1400 risk zones while there where already 36,000 confirmed infection cases. There is little transparency on how those risk zones are estimated. Developers of the app state that only one fifth of the data provided by the Health Ministry is clean enough to be fed to the app.

The data collected is stored and proccessed in Google and Amazon servers. The App does not do live geotracking but still has permissions to access GPS and Bluetooth on your device. Still, nowhere in its Terms of Privacy does it state why the app needs those permitions.

The government refused to make the app open source, unlike India, Singapore and the UK for example. The App is being developed by a council of ministers in collaboration with a group of public and private entities. There have been talks about importing Korea's app as well as about using Google and Apple's API but so far there is no official statement on how exactly the app is operating.

Writter: Miguel Morachimo
Source: Hiperderecho

Location

Peru

Related learning resources

Examples of Abuse

More about our partner

Tracking the Global Response to COVID-19

See more examples

Apps and Covid-19

Location data and Covid-19

Government access

Health data

Location

Our campaign

Fighting the Global Covid-19 Power-Grab

Date

Monday, June 8, 2020

Content

Educational

Stories

Derechos Digitales: Analysis of the Chilean Government app

staff — Tue, 19 May 2020 16:26:55 +0000

Derechos Digitales: Analysis of the Chilean Government app staff Tuesday, May 19, 2020

Our partners from Derechos Digitales analysed the Chilean Government App to respond to the Corona Virus, saying that it will likely be useless and infringing on existing privacy rights (in Spanish)

Link: https://www.derechosdigitales.org/14387/coronapp-la-inutilidad-del-atajo-tecnologico-desplegado-por-el-gobierno-y-sus-riesgos/

Location

Related learning resources

Examples of Abuse

More about our partner

Tracking the Global Response to COVID-19

See more examples

Apps and Covid-19

Civil society's Covid response

Date

Thursday, April 16, 2020

Content

Educational

Stories

Presentación de información a la Relatoría Especial de Derechos Económicos, Sociales, Culturales y Ambientales (DESCA) de la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH) sobre la situación de los DESCA en la región

tech-admin — Mon, 24 Feb 2020 17:49:45 +0000

Date

Tuesday, February 4, 2020

Language

Spanish

Audiences and Purpose

Influence key stakeholders

Content

Advocacy

Summary

PI y sus partners acogen el llamado de la Relatoría Especial de la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH) sobre la situación de los Derechos Económicos, Sociales, Culturales y Ambientales en la región.

Media

iachr sp cover.jpg

Key points

El uso de la tecnología y los datos para la realización de los derechos económicos, sociales, culturales y ambientales debe tener en cuenta desde el principio las salvaguardas y garantías del debido proceso.
Una postura firme contra la explotación de datos es esencial para cuestionar la dinámica de poder actual y garantizar la dignidad y la autonomía de las personas.

TEDIC, InternetLab, Derechos Digitales, la Fundación Karisma, Dejusticia, la Asociación por los Derechos Civiles y Privacy International acogen el llamado de la Relatoría Especial sobre Derechos Económicos, Sociales, Culturales y Ambientales (DESCA) de la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH) de enviar información para la elaboración del Informe Anual sobre DESCA del año 2019, que se presentará ante la Organización de los Estados Americanos (OEA) en 2020.

El objeto de este documento es describir acontecimientos ocurridos en la región en áreas claves de interés que los coautores de la presentación han observado en relación con la realización progresiva de los Derechos Económicos, Sociales, Culturales y Ambientales (DESCA), especialmente respecto al uso de datos y tecnología en conexión con el acceso y el goce de estos derechos.

El uso de la tecnología y los datos para la realización de los derechos económicos, sociales, culturales y ambientales plantea, entre otros puntos, interrogantes clave en relación con la protección, el respeto y la promoción del derecho a la privacidad consagrado en el artículo 11 de la Convención Americana sobre Derechos Humanos, en el artículo 17 del Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos y en el artículo 12 de la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos. Puesto que los sistemas que están siendo implementados interfieren con la privacidad de las personas, deben cumplir el principio de legalidad y, además, ser necesarios y proporcionales al objetivo legítimo que pretenden alcanzar. Aparte de la falta de protección de las personas y sus datos cuando interactúan con los sistemas implantados, éstos también tienen repercusiones en la no discriminación y la igualdad.

En su informe anual a la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas sobre el estado de bienestar digital y los derechos humanos, el Relator Especial de las Naciones Unidas sobre la extrema pobreza y los derechos humanos presentó tres observaciones que, como se destaca en las áreas de interés descritas en esta presentación de información, también deberían ser tenidas en cuenta por la Relatoría Especial sobre Derechos Económicos, Sociales, Culturales y Ambientales (DESCA), incluido que los gobiernos corren el riego de “desembocar, sin ser conscientes de ello, en una distopía de bienestar digital”, que “las grandes empresas tecnológicas [a menudo llamadas ‘big tech’] actúan en una esfera en la que los derechos humanos están prácticamente ausentes”, y que “en lugar de obsesionarse con el fraude, el ahorro, las sanciones y las definiciones de eficiencia determinadas por el mercado, el punto de partida sea cómo transformar los presupuestos de asistencia social mediante la tecnología para mejorar el nivel de vida de las personas vulnerables y desfavorecidas”.

Indiscutiblemente, la tecnología puede ayudar a que los gobiernos cumplan su obligación de realizar los derechos económicos, sociales, culturales y ambientales y a que resuelvan algunos de los desafíos fundamentales que enfrentan al hacerlo con el fin de garantizar que las personas y las comunidades vivan con dignidad, pero es necesario tener en cuenta desde el principio las salvaguardas y garantías del debido proceso a fin de identificar y mitigar los riesgos y permitir el acceso a la reparación.

Este primer llamado de la Relatoría Especial sobre los Derechos Económicos, Sociales, Culturales y Ambientales es un importante primer paso, que brinda la oportunidad de dibujar el panorama actual de la situación de los DESCA en la región. Esperamos que conduzca a la adopción de medidas concretas adicionales que aborden las temáticas planteadas en este documento, y a la adopción de medidas por parte de los gobiernos, la industria y terceros para velar por el respeto, la promoción y la protección de los derechos económicos, sociales, culturales y ambientales en la región.

Una postura firme contra la explotación de datos es esencial para cuestionar la dinámica de poder actual, garantizar la dignidad y la autonomía de las personas y evitar nuevas violaciones de los derechos y las libertades fundamentales.

This submission is available in English.

Repeating Image and Text

More about our partner

La Asociación por los Derechos Civiles

Country of Operation

Argentina

Region of Operation

Asociación por los Derechos Civiles

Website

Dejusticia

Country of Operation

Region of Operation

Website

Dejusticia

Derechos Digitales

Country of Operation

Region of Operation

Website

Fundación Karisma

Country of Operation

Region of Operation

Website

Fundación Karisma

La Asociación de Tecnología, Educación, Desarrollo, Investigación, Comunicación (TEDIC)

Country of Operation

Paraguay

Region of Operation

Influence key stakeholders

Website

TEDIC

Target Stakeholders

United Nations
- Human Rights Council
- Special Procedures
- Treaty bodies
- Universal Periodic Reviews
African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
EU Fundamental Rights Agency
National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs)

Our campaign

Rising concerns around austerity, transparency, efficiency and financial management have fed into a narrative of technology as a magic cure-all to socio-economic and political issues.

Almost all of us will, at some point in our lives, interact with the state to ask for some form of benefit. Whether you are a child relying on the assistance of child services, or you're sick and need healthcare, or you receive unemployment benefits, or you're disabled and need support, or you need financial assistance to pay rent, or you're retired and receive a pension.

Rising concerns around austerity, transparency, efficiency and financial management have fed into a narrative of technology as a magic cure-all to socio-economic and political issues. Newly established or reformed social protection programmes have gradually become founded and reliant on the collection and processing of vast amounts of personal data; often access and management is tied to the provision of unique identifier; and increasingly the models for decision-making include data exploitation and components of automated-decision making and profiling.

We work with others to ensure protection of and stop the exploitation of patient data because accessing reproductive healthcare should not require giving up your human rights, including privacy.

As access to reproductive healthcare becomes increasingly digitalised, companies and governments must ensure that the digital systems are built with people's human rights considered and protected.

There has been a notable increase in the digitalisation of health initiatives across the world. Accessing reproductive healthcare oftentimes requires interacting with a digitalised system that in some way collects vast amounts of personal information. For example, digital initiatives such as SMS appointment scheduling, remote access to care and counselling, health workers using a mobile phone to track an individual pregnant mother over the cycle of pregnancy, or a child over his/her cycle of immunization, and the use of mobile applications, sensors, wearable devices and others, all collect personal information.

But those developing these systems do not always consider the impact they will have on those who will use the systems, and how best to protect the information once it's collected.

The absence of human rights considerations, including privacy, in the implementation of these types of services can cause short- and long-term harm to the people trying to access the services.

This campaign aims to bring attention to digital health initiatives that have failed to consider the impact of these systems, and how to ensure they protect and respect the rights of those they serve.

We advocate for changes to be made to those systems and for the development of future systems to take a human rights-based approach. Like in many other sectors, technology can help and contribute to improving the rights of people. But with it also come risks, especially if a system is poorly designed, whether intentionally or not.

Learn more

Accessing public services should not mean signing up to systems of surveillance.

Surveillance and data exploitation affect us all, but by learning about the unique experiences and challenges faced by LGBTIQ+ populations we can better understand how patriarchy and systems of oppression function.

Surveillance and data exploitation affect us all, but by learning about the unique experiences and challenges faced by women, trans and gender diverse people, we can better understand how patriarchy and systems of oppression function.

Being in a vulnerable situation should not involve greater exposure to government and corporate surveillance.

Migrants are bearing the burden and losing agency in their migration experience: their fate is being put in the hands of systems that are feeding the surveillance and data exploitation ecosystem.

Accessing social protection programmes should not mean signing up to systems of surveillance.

Being able to assert who we are and what claims we have can be empowering. But identity checks are increasingly conducted and required, both with and without our knowledge.

The data generated through peoples' use of social media becomes valuable intelligence to others, who want to monitor, profile, and manipulate.

Automated decision-making, about people, from people's data, will shape their lives -- what they have access to, what they can do, and what they may become.

Data Protection laws seek to protect people's data by providing individuals with rights over their data, imposing rules on the way in which companies and governments use data, and establishing regulators to enforce the laws.

The use of technology and data in the realisation of economic, social and cultural rights raises, among others, some key concerns in relation to the protection, respect and promotion of the right to privacy.

Our fight

Safeguarding Peoples' Dignity

The promises made with innovation have not been enjoyed by all equally. Innovative solutions can be designed to empower and serve individuals and communities, rather than state and corporate power. A new approach to data and technology must be established to make this a reality.

Realise Our Rights to Live with Dignity

Governments are embracing systems that would enable them to progressively realise social, economic and cultural rights; many of these systems interfere with individuals’ privacy.

Submission to the Special Rapporteurship on Economic, Social, Cultural and Environmental Rights (ESCER) of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) regarding the situation of ESCER in the region

tech-admin — Mon, 24 Feb 2020 17:49:28 +0000

Date

Tuesday, February 4, 2020

Audiences and Purpose

Content

Advocacy

Summary

PI and global partners respond to call of Special Rapporteur of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on situation economic, social, cultural and environmental rights in the region.

Media

iachr eng cover.jpg

Key points

The use of technology and data in the realisation of economic, social, cultural and environmental rights must be accompanied by strong safeguards and due process.
A strong stand against data exploitation is essential to challenge current power dynamics to ensure people’s dignity and autonomy.

TEDIC, InternetLab, Derechos Digitales, Fundación Karisma, Dejusticia, Asociación por los Derechos Civiles and Privacy International welcome the call made by the Special Rapporteurship on Economic, Social, Cultural and Environmental Rights (ESCER) of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) to inform the preparation of the Annual Report of the ESCER for the year 2019, which will be presented to the Organization of American States (OAS) during 2020.

This submission aims to outline developments from around the region as they relate to key areas of concern observed by the co-submitters in relation to the progressive realisation of Economic, Social, Cultural and Environmental Rights (ESCER), in particular with regards to the use of data and technology in relation to the access and enjoyment of these rights.

The use of technology and data in the realisation of economic, social, cultural and environmental rights raises some key concerns in relation to, among others, the protection, respect and promotion of the right to privacy as provided for under Article 11 of the American Convention on Human Rights, Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As the systems being deployed interfere with individuals’ privacy, they need to comply with the principle of legality and be necessary and proportionate to the legitimate aim they are trying to achieve. Beyond the failure to protect individuals and their data as they interact with the systems put in place, these also have implications for non-discrimination and equality.

In his annual report to the UN General Assembly on digital welfare states and human rights, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights presented three observations which, as highlighted by the areas of concern outlined in this submission, must also be taken into account by the Special Rapporteurship on Economic, Social, Cultural and Environmental Rights (ESCER) including that governments were risking of “stumbling, zombie-like, into a digital welfare dystopia”, that “big technology companies (frequently referred to as “big tech”) operate in an almost human rights-free zone”, and that “instead of obsessing about fraud, cost savings, sanctions, and market-driven definitions of efficiency, the starting point should be on how welfare budgets could be transformed through technology to ensure a higher standard of living for the vulnerable and disadvantaged.”

There is no question that technology can help governments to address their obligations to realise economic, social, cultural and environmental rights and some of the key challenges they face in doing so to ensure individuals and communities live with dignity, but safeguards and due process guarantees need to be taken into account from the outset in order to identify and mitigate risks, and provide access to redress.

This first call from the Special Rapporteurship on Economic, Social, Cultural and Environmental Rights is an important first step which provides the opportunity to map out the current panorama of the current situation of the ESCER in the region. We hope that it will lead to further concrete actions to address the issues raised in this submission and to call for measures to be taken by governments, industry, and other third parties to ensure the respect, promotion and protection of economic, social, cultural and environmental rights in the region.

A strong stand against data exploitation is essential to challenge current power dynamics, to ensure people’s dignity and autonomy, and to prevent further violations of fundamental rights and freedoms.

Este documento está disponible en español.

Repeating Image and Text

More about our partner

La Asociación por los Derechos Civiles

Country of Operation

Argentina

Region of Operation

Asociación por los Derechos Civiles

Website

Dejusticia

Country of Operation

Region of Operation

Website

Dejusticia

Derechos Digitales

Country of Operation

Region of Operation

Website

Fundación Karisma

Country of Operation

Region of Operation

Website

Fundación Karisma

La Asociación de Tecnología, Educación, Desarrollo, Investigación, Comunicación (TEDIC)

Country of Operation

Paraguay

Region of Operation

Realise Our Rights to Live with Dignity

Website

TEDIC

Target Stakeholders

Our campaign

Rising concerns around austerity, transparency, efficiency and financial management have fed into a narrative of technology as a magic cure-all to socio-economic and political issues.

We work with others to ensure protection of and stop the exploitation of patient data because accessing reproductive healthcare should not require giving up your human rights, including privacy.

As access to reproductive healthcare becomes increasingly digitalised, companies and governments must ensure that the digital systems are built with people's human rights considered and protected.

But those developing these systems do not always consider the impact they will have on those who will use the systems, and how best to protect the information once it's collected.

The absence of human rights considerations, including privacy, in the implementation of these types of services can cause short- and long-term harm to the people trying to access the services.

Learn more

Accessing public services should not mean signing up to systems of surveillance.

Being in a vulnerable situation should not involve greater exposure to government and corporate surveillance.

Accessing social protection programmes should not mean signing up to systems of surveillance.

Being able to assert who we are and what claims we have can be empowering. But identity checks are increasingly conducted and required, both with and without our knowledge.

The data generated through peoples' use of social media becomes valuable intelligence to others, who want to monitor, profile, and manipulate.

Automated decision-making, about people, from people's data, will shape their lives -- what they have access to, what they can do, and what they may become.

Our fight

Safeguarding Peoples' Dignity

Realise Our Rights to Live with Dignity

Governments are embracing systems that would enable them to progressively realise social, economic and cultural rights; many of these systems interfere with individuals’ privacy.

Vigilancia, control social e inequidad: la tecnología refuerza vulnerabilidades estructurales en América Latina

staff — Thu, 17 Oct 2019 10:55:31 +0000

Language English

CC: BY (Kirill Sharkovski)-SA

Este artículo fue escrito por Jamila Venturini, Coordinadora regional de Derechos Digitales. El artículo fue publicado por primera vez aquí. This article is available in English.

La implementación de programas que condicionan el acceso a servicios básicos por medio de vigilancia estatal y privada agudizan la inequidad imperante en el continente.

Mientras la brecha entre ricos y pobres se incrementa en el mundo, América Latina sigue siendo la región donde la riqueza se distribuye de forma más desigual. Según la Comisión Económica para la América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), existen marcados desequilibrios territoriales entre los distintos niveles socioeconómicos en aspectos como la esperanza de vida, la mortalidad infantil, la tasa de analfabetismo y el acceso a agua al interior de las viviendas. Así, la altísima inequidad que asola al continente influye directamente en el bienestar de sus habitantes, sus posibilidades de desarrollo y en el ejercicio de sus derechos fundamentales.

La implementación de programas que condicionan el acceso a servicios básicos a la vigilancia estatal y privada ejemplifican de manera clara no solamente el hecho de que las tecnologías no son neutras, sino que impactan de forma diferenciada a distintos grupos humanos, de acuerdo a su género, al color de su piel y a su clase social.

Aprovechándose de las deficiencias de nuestros sistemas legales y explotando sus áreas grises, la industria ha impulsado agresivamente un tecnosolucionismo chauvinista, abrazado irresponsablemente por una clase política con ganas de figurar a la sombra de una idea tristemente reducida de progreso. Así, el negocio se transforma en la promesa de un beneficio acotado, que se consigue a costa de los derechos de quienes no tienen más opción que someterse al escrutinio constante, a la vigilancia, al control, a la discriminación. Hablar de desigualdad en América Latina es hablar de la ponderación que se hace entre los derechos de quienes pueden acceder a otras posibilidades y quienes no.

La inequidad se esconde hoy tras una serie de muletillas de significado impreciso – big data, decisiones algorítmicas, inteligencia artificial – que en nombre de la eficiencia intentan naturalizar los sesgos bajo los cuales operan, haciendo inescrutables los sistemas que los procesan y la forma en que son usados para regular el acceso a programas sociales, el uso del transporte público o la asistencia a eventos populares.

Ejemplos no faltan. En Argentina, la provincia de Salta firmó en 2017 un acuerdo con Microsoft para utilizar inteligencia artificial en la prevención del embarazo adolescente y la deserción escolar. Según la empresa, a partir de datos recolectados por medio de encuestas a sectores vulnerables de la sociedad “los algoritmos inteligentes permiten identificar características en las personas que podrían derivar en alguno de estos problemas y advierten al gobierno para que puedan trabajar en la prevención de los mismos”. Los datos recabados son procesados por servidores de Microsoft distribuidos alrededor del mundo y el resultado de ese procesamiento apunta específicamente a las adolescentes identificadas como personas bajo riesgo, afectando no solamente su privacidad, sino también su autonomía y generando amplio potencial de discriminación. Se trata, finalmente, de un mecanismo dirigido de control sobre personas en situación de vulnerabilidad que son expuestas a intervenciones sin su consentimiento, reforzando la vulnerabilidad de las personas que son privadas incluso de la posibilidad para decidir sobre esas intervenciones.

Aunque se argumente que los datos utilizados para la proyección son entregados voluntariamente, es cuestionable la idea de que las niñas y adolescentes afectadas por estas medidas –o sus responsables– puedan prestar un consentimiento activo y realmente consciente sobre las implicaciones de entregar información específica sobre sus hábitos sexuales y potencial embarazo. Cabe señalar que Salta fue la última provincia argentina que dejó de impartir educación religiosa en las escuelas públicas después de un fallo de la Corte Suprema, reconociendo la existencia de violaciones a los derechos a la igualdad y a la no discriminación, así como a la privacidad de los ciudadanos y ciudadanas. El uso tecnológico descrito no es sino expresión de problemas más amplios para comprender los ámbitos de autonomía y privacidad de las personas, con un propósito político.

En Brasil, el Ministerio de Ciudadanía firmó un acuerdo con el gobierno de Salta y Microsoft para implementar un programa similar. En este caso, además de la prevención del embarazo adolescente y la deserción escolar, se pretende anticipar cuestiones como la desnutrición y enfermedades en la primera infancia. El país sería el quinto en la región en compartir la experiencia argentina. Además de dudas sobre el consentimiento informado y el acceso del Estado a informaciones sensibles sobre poblaciones vulnerables, quedan sin respuesta algunas preguntas sobre qué otros usos u previsiones se pueden extraer de esos datos y cuáles los límites para su tratamiento por parte de Microsoft y los gobiernos involucrados en el programa.

Por su parte, Chile inició en 2019 la implantación piloto de una herramienta que busca detectar a niños, niñas y adolescentes en situación de riesgo. Según el Ministerio de Desarrollo Social y Familia, Alerta Niñez es un instrumento preventivo que “identifica el conjunto de condiciones individuales, familiares, del entorno y de los pares de los niños y niñas y adolescentes, que tienden a presentarse cuando existe un riesgo de vulneración de derechos de niños, niñas y adolescentes”. El sistema se basa en el procesamiento estadístico de grandes cantidades de datos provenientes de organismos públicos para calificar a la población menor de 18 años, ordenando a las personas según su probabilidad de sufrir vulneraciones.

Aunque en este caso el sistema haya sido desarrollado por una universidad privada local, nuevamente se trata de una iniciativa invasiva de recolección de datos sensibles de menores de edad que conlleva gran riesgo de profundizar situaciones de prejuicio y estigmatización hacia grupos históricamente vulnerables. Además, estos procesos implican la transferencia de datos personales a terceros y la posibilidad de que esos datos sean usados para fines distintos a los que permitieron su recolección; sin bases legales ni garantías de que la información generada no será utilizada a futuro con otros propósitos, como iniciativas de policiamiento predictivo por ejemplo.

Dado que cuestiones como embarazo adolescente, evasión escolar y desnutrición son problemas estructurales en la región, es extremadamente cuestionable que las políticas asociadas sean mediadas o condicionadas a la recolección de grandes cantidades de datos. Que no exista a su vez una preocupación por los derechos de niños, niñas y adolescentes, concordante con instrumentos vigentes en toda la región, da cuenta de un problema más profundo.

Vigilancia, control y exclusión

En Chile, la implementación de sistemas de identificación biométrica en el sistema nacional de salud preocupa por las posibles limitaciones que podría generar a poblaciones marginadas y empobrecidas -e incluso a personas mayores, por la pérdida de legibilidad en rasgos como las huellas digitales- para su acceso a servicios básicos de salud.

La implementación del llamado “Sistema Biométrico para la Seguridad Alimentaria” en Venezuela, a través del cual se exige a los ciudadanos la verificación de su identidad a través de la huella digital para adquirir productos categorizados como de “primera necesidad” (productos alimentarios, de higiene y medicinas), ha generado denuncias por discriminación hacia personas extranjeras -documentadas e indocumentadas- y personas transgénero. La situación es particularmente preocupante dada la situación de escasez de bienes esenciales y la crisis humanitaria que se agrava en el país, principalmente afectando los derechos a la alimentación y salud de las poblaciones más vulnerables.

En São Paulo se implementó hace dos años el uso de cámaras de reconocimiento facial en el sistema de transporte público, con la justificación de que ayudarían a evitar el fraude en el uso de beneficios sociales asociados al transporte, como descuentos a adultos mayores, estudiantes y personas con discapacidad. En estos dos años el sistema ha bloqueado más de 300 mil tarjetas supuestamente usadas indebidamente, o sea, no por sus titulares. Por otra parte, la municipalidad ha anunciado la suspensión total las tarjetas anónimas y ha implementado medidas para obligar el registro de las tarjetas con datos de identificación únicos y residenciales. Este tipo de medida puede impactar en el acceso de personas no registradas –como personas sin techo e inmigrantes– al servicio. En una ciudad de las dimensiones de São Paulo, las tarjetas que permiten la integración con descuento a distintos tipos de transporte son fundamentales para la locomoción de gran parte de la población al trabajo, escuela y actividades culturales. El bloqueo o imposibilidad de acceso a medios de transporte puede tener un gran impacto en la vida y el desarrollo de las personas.

Además de crear limitaciones al acceso a servicios públicos para grupos históricamente marginados de la población, los sistemas de identificación obligatoria y biométricos implican una “sobrevigilancia” hacia esos grupos. No se sabe cómo son utilizados, agregados y compartidos los datos recolectados de esos grupos, ni parece proporcional exigir un nivel tan alto de información para la entrega de beneficios limitados o condicionados. En el caso venezolano las bases de datos biométricas provienen del sistema electoral, para ser utilizadas tanto por operadores estatales -incluyendo funcionarios de migración y policías- como por cajeros de supermercados y farmacias, sin ningún tipo de requisito legal previo. En São Paulo, el gobierno municipal llegó a anunciar la venta de las bases de datos de las tarjetas utilizadas en el transporte pero, bajo presión pública y después de la aprobación de una ley de protección de datos en Brasil, cambió su posición.

No está demás reiterar que solamente se someten a esos sistemas a los usuarios de sistemas públicos de salud, asistencia social y transporte que, en general, no incluyen las élites locales que pueden prescindir de ellos y recurrir a prestadores privados; manteniendo mayor control sobre su información y preservando su privacidad.

Desigualdad, discriminación y pobreza

Que los mecanismos de vigilancia sean implementados de manera diferencial hacia los grupos más vulnerables no es novedad, esto remonta a procesos de control social y precarización que han estado en la base de la construcción de muchas de nuestras sociedades para asegurar tanto la dominancia de las clases sociales y económicas más privilegiadas como la explotación de los más vulnerables. Aún hoy, con las posibilidades ofrecidas por las tecnologías para optimizar la entrega de servicios de toda clase, vemos que esas tecnologías son usadas para mantener esa estructura social desigual. Con asistencia de la tecnología, la vulnerabilidad es castigada con vigilancia.

No tiene por qué ser así. La promesa de la tecnología es la mejora de nuestras vidas. Esa promesa debería ser transversal a toda la sociedad y no estar reservada para aquellas personas que puedan costear las mejoras, o que puedan pagar el precio de no tener que someterse a aplicaciones abusivas de la tecnología. Estos desarrollos y despliegues tecnológicos no deberían resultar en una nueva forma de discriminación que profundice otras desigualdades como un daño colateral que debemos asumir en favor de un supuesto bien mayoritario.

Una aproximación de derechos fundamentales con una comprensión interseccional de los distintos tipos de exclusiones que las tecnologías promueven y clausuran es la única manera de hacer frente a la desigualdad a la que millones de personas están siendo sometidas en el continente. Solo así, las nuevas tecnologías quizás puedan convertirse en un factor que ayude al cierre de las brechas que enfrentamos ahora.

Large Image (DO NOT USE)

List Image (DO NOT USE)

List Icon (DO NOT USE)

What PI is fighting for

Learn more

Social protection programmes

Poverty

Our fight

Safeguarding Peoples' Dignity

More about our partner

When Big Brother Pays Your Benefits

Our campaign

Surveillance and social control: how technology reinforces structural inequality in Latin America

staff — Thu, 17 Oct 2019 10:36:44 +0000

Language English

Picture: CC: BY (Kirill Sharkovski)-SA

This article was written by Jamila Venturini from Derechos Digitales. The original version (in Spanish) is available here.

How implementing social protection programmes that condition access to basic services to state and private surveillance exacerbate the prevailing inequality on the continent.

While the gap between rich and poor is increasing in the world, Latin America remains the most unequal region of the world. According to the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), there are marked regional imbalances between different socioeconomic levels in areas such as life expectancy, infant mortality, illiteracy and access to water inside homes. Thus, the high inequality plaguing the continent directly influences the well-being of its inhabitants, their potential for development and exercise of their fundamental rights.

The implementation of programs conditioning access to basic services to state and private surveillance clearly exemplifies not only the fact that technologies are not neutral, but how they differently impact several human groups according to their gender, skin color and social class.

Taking advantage of the shortcomings of our legal systems and exploiting its grey areas, the tech industry working with governments has aggressively propelled a form of “technosolutionism” that is irresponsibly embraced by a political class driven by a diminished idea of progress. What is at stake is now is the potientiality for limited improvement, which could be achieved at the expense of the rights of those who have no choice but to undergo constant scrutiny, monitoring, control and discrimination.

Today, inequality is hidden behind a series of empty phrases - big data, algorithmic decisions, artificial intelligence - which, in the name of efficiency, attempt to normalise the biases under which they operate, making the systems that process them and the way they are used to regulate access to social programs, public transportationor attendance at popular events opaque to public scrutiny.

There are plenty of examples. In Argentina, the province of Salta signed an agreement with Microsoft in 2017 to use artificial intelligence to prevent teenage pregnancy and school dropout. According to the company, based on data collected among populations in vulnerable situations, "intelligent algorithms identify characteristics in people that can lead to some of these problems [teenage pregnancy and school dropout] and warn the government so that they can work on prevention." The data collected is processed by Microsoft servers distributed around the world and this processing specifically targets adolescents identified as people at risk, affecting not only their privacy, but also their autonomy and generating a wide potential for discrimination. It is, finally, a mechanism of control over targeted individuals in vulnerable situations who are exposed to interventions without their consent, and which reinforces the vulnerability of people who are deprived even of the possibility to decide on such interventions.

Although it could be argued that the data used for projection is voluntarily submitted, it is questionable that girls and adolescents affected by these measures - or their guardians - can give explicit consent considering the implications of providing specific information about their
sexual habits and potential pregnancy. It should be noted that Salta was the last Argentine province that ceased to provide religious education in public schools after a ruling by the Supreme Court, recognizing the existence of violations of the rights to equality and non-discrimination, as well as the privacy of citizens. This reliance on technology described above is thereforenothing more than an expression of broader problems to understand the areas of autonomy and privacy of people, with a political purpose.

In Brazil, the Ministry of Citizenship signed an agreement with the government of Salta and Microsoft to implement a similar program. In this case, in addition to the prevention of teenage pregnancy and school dropout, it is intended to anticipate issues such as malnutrition and diseases in early childhood. The country would be the fifth in the region to repeat the Argentine experience. In addition to the questions about informed consent and state access to sensitive information on populations in vulnerable situations, some questions remain unanswered, such as the other uses or predictions that can be extracted from these data and the potential risks, considering its processing by Microsoft and the governments involved in the program.

Chile began in 2019 its own pilot implementation of a tool that seeks to detect children and adolescents at risk. According to the Ministry of Social Development and Family, Alerta Niñez, it is a preventive instrument that "identifies the set of individual, family, environment and peer conditions of children and adolescents, which tend to occur when there is a risk of violation of their rights." Using the statistical processing of large amounts of data from public bodies, the system gives a score to individual children and adolescents based on their probability to suffer rights violation.

Although in this case the system has been developed by a local private university, it is again an invasive initiative to collect sensitive data of minors that carries a great risk of deepening prejudice and stigmatization towards historically vulnerable groups. In addition, these processes involve the transfer of personal data to third parties and the possibility that such data is used for purposes other than those agreed on; without legal bases or guarantees that the information generated will not be used in the future for other purposes, such as predictive policing initiatives for example.

Given that issues such as teenage pregnancy, school dropout and malnutrition are structural problems in the region, it is highly questionable that the associated policies are mediated or conditioned on the collection of large amounts of data. The fact that there is also no concern for the rights of children and adolescents, in accordance with existing human rights instruments throughout the region, shows a deeper problem.

Surveillance, control and exclusion

In Chile, the implementation of biometric identification systems in the national health system is of concern, due to the possible limitations in accessing basic health services that it could generate for marginalized and impoverished populations. This would also affect senior citizens, as their fingerprints can become harder to process.

The implementation of the so-called "Biometric System for Food Safety" in Venezuela requires citizens to verify their identity through their fingerprints to acquire food and hygiene products and medicine. It has led to complaints of discrimination against foreigners -documented and undocumented- and transgender people. The situation is particularly worrying given the circumstance of scarcity of essential goods and the humanitarian crisis that is worsening in the country, mainly affecting the rights to food and health of populations in the most vulnerable situations.

In São Paulo, the use of facial recognition cameras was implemented two years ago in the public transportation system, with the justification that they would help prevent fraud in the use of social benefits associated with transportation, such as discounts for seniors, students and people with disabilities. Since then, the system has blocked over 300 thousand cards allegedly used improperly, that is, not by their holders. At the same time, the Municipal Government has announced the total suspension of anonymous cards and has implemented measures to force their registration with unique and residential identification data. This type of measure can impact the access of unregistered persons - such as homeless people and immigrants - to the service. In a city the size of São Paulo, cards that allow discounted travel on different types of transportation are critical to get most of the population to work, school and cultural activities. Blocking or hampering access to transportation can have a major impact on people's lives and development.

In addition to creating limitations on access to public services for historically marginalized segments of the population, compulsory and biometric identification systems imply “oversurveilling” these groups. There is limited information on how the data collected is used, aggregated and shared, nor does it seem proportional to demand sensitive information for the delivery of basic services or social benefits. In the Venezuelan case, biometric databases come from the electoral system and are used both by state operators - including immigration officials and police officers - as well as by supermarket and pharmacy cashiers, without any prior legal requirement. In São Paulo, the municipal government came to announce the sale of the travelcard databases but, under public pressure and after the approval of a data protection law in Brazil, the government changed its position.

It is worth remembering that only the users of public health, social assistance and public transportation systems are subjected to these systems. Local elites who can turn to private providers therefore manage to maintain greater control over their information and preserve their privacy.

Inequality, discrimination and poverty

The fact that surveillance mechanisms differently targets the most vulnerable groups is not new, it goes back to the precarious social control processes that underpin many of our societies. Even today, with the possibilities offered by technologies to optimize the delivery of services of all kinds, we see that these technologies are being used to maintain an unequal social structure in which the exercise of rights is restricted to a small elite. With the help of technology, surveillance punishes vulnerability.

It does not have to be this way. The promise of technology is the improvement of our lives. That promise should be transversal to the whole society and not reserved for those who can afford the improvements or who can pay the price of not having to undergo abusive uses of technology.

A fundamental rights approach with an intersectional understanding of the different types of exclusions that technologies promote or end is the only way to tackle the inequality that millions of people are facing on the continent. Only then, new technologies may become a factor that helps close the gaps we face now.

Large Image (DO NOT USE)

List Image (DO NOT USE)

List Icon (DO NOT USE)

What PI is fighting for

Realise Our Rights to Live with Dignity

Learn more

Social protection programmes

Poverty

Our fight

Safeguarding Peoples' Dignity

More about our partner