Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions - Use of ICTs to secure the right to life - HRC 29 session

In the present report, submitted to the Human Rights Council pursuant to its resolution 26/12, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions discusses the implications of information and communications technologies (ICTs) for the protection of the right to life.
The Special Rapporteur surveys existing applications of ICTs for promoting, protecting and monitoring human rights. While noting the potentially transformative role of “civilian witnesses” in documenting human rights violations and the challenges of using the evidence generated and transmitted by those witnesses — such as verification —, the Special Rapporteur considers how various international human rights mechanisms currently benefit from such material.
He makes several recommendations, including that the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights appoint a specialist in digital evidence to assist it in making the best use of ICTs.
It makes a reference to gender on the paragraph 41 when it says:
41. In order to fully realize the potential of ICTs for human rights work, it is necessary to address the issue of the digital divide in terms of both access and literacy. On the one hand, ICTs facilitate
pluralism within human rights work, allowing amateurs to complement professionals; on the other hand, however, they can create new lines of inclusion and exclusion that often correspond with pre-existing barriers to access to resources and power, such as language, education, affluence or gender.7 Moreover, in addition to providing opportunities to speak, pluralism is also about being heard. Being heard by human rights fact-finders may depend on one’s ability to produce verifiable information, which can in turn be determined by one’s digital literacy and digital footprint. The greater availability of digital information on human rights violations in one context or region may lead to such violations being prioritized over more egregious but less visible violations elsewhere.
Contents
I. Activities of the Special Rapporteur........................................................................ 3
A. Communications.............................................................................................. 3
B. Visits................................................................................................................ 3
C. Press releases................................................................................................... 3
D. International and national meetings................................................................. 4
II. Use of information and communications technologies to secure
the right to life.......................................................................................................... 5
A. Background...................................................................................................... 5
B. Promotion and advocacy.................................................................................. 8
C. Prevention and protection................................................................................ 9
D. Monitoring and fact-finding............................................................................. 12
E. Evaluating evidence collected using information and communications
technologies..................................................................................................... 14
F. Use of information and communications technologies by human
rights mechanisms............................................................................................ 17
III. Conclusion................................................................................................................ 21
IV. Recommendations.................................................................................................... 22
A. To the United Nations ..................................................................................... 22
B. To regional human rights mechanisms ........................................................... 22
C. To States ......................................................................................................... 22
D. To civil society organizations and academic institutions ............................... 23
E. To donors ........................................................................................................ 23
F. To technology and software corporations ....................................................... 23