Data Loading...

C20 Policy Dialogue: Digitalization Sub-WG Flipbook PDF

C20 Policy Dialogue: Digitalization Sub-WG. 27-28 July 2022


140 Views
52 Downloads
FLIP PDF 1.46MB

DOWNLOAD FLIP

REPORT DMCA

The Education, Digitalization, and Civic Space Working Group

C20 Policy Dialogue Jakarta, July 27-28 2022

House Rules Mute your microphone when not talking. Keep your camera on if necessary and/or possible. The committee will record the meetings for documentations needs. If you are not consenting to be recorded, please let the committee know. We provide translation for the meeting, you can access it through the zoom meeting feature (Meeting ID: 880 7204 0661, passcode: c20). Use “Raise Hand” and “Chat” features to optimize a dynamic meeting. Be mindful to others when giving comments/feedbacks. We do not tolerate any harassment in any form.

Agenda Time (Western Indonesia Time)

Duration

07.30-07.35 PM

5 mins

Opening

07.35-07.40 PM

5 mins

Opening Remarks

07.40-07.47 PM

7 mins

Policy Brief Presentation: Education Sub-Working Group

07.47-07.54 PM

7 mins

Policy Brief Presentation: Digitalization Sub-Working Group

07.54-08.01 PM

7 mins

Policy Brief Presentation: Civic Space Sub-Working Group

08.01-08.36 PM

35 mins

Responses from DEWG, National Human Rights Commission, Ministry of Law and Human Rights, EU Delegation, German Embassy

08.36-08.55 PM

19 mins

Responses from EDCSWG Members

08.55-09.00 PM

5 mins

Closing

Agenda

C20 Sub-WG Digitalization Priority Issues:

Putting Human Rights at the Centre of Digital Transformation

Inclusive Digital ID and Health Data Systems

Human Rights-based Approach to CBDF

Open and Free Knowledge

Inclusive Digital ID & Health Data Systems



As the COVID-19 pandemic increases the demand for access to timely, relevant, and quality health data, a good data governance is essentially needed to structure responses, allocate resources, and measure the effectiveness of interventions.



The handling of COVID-19 transmission is oftentimes approached with technological-driven approach in which public authorities develop, or incorporate the available data into, digital ID system for tracking and tracing, and mostly, using the system further to identify health and social services, leading to privacy challenges and discriminations.



While digital ID system has been proven helpful for some occasions, its negative impacts are also visible, affecting mostly those living with stigmatized identities (PLHIV, transgender, etc.) or underserved communities (indigenous groups, refugees, women, etc).



Digital ID system is not native to COVID-19 but the pandemic has intensified its uses so that global leaders need to ensure the balance between techno-solutionism and human-centric approach with accountable, inclusive, transparent, and privacy-respected development and adoption.

Priority asks and recommendations: There is a need for harmonization of access/participation in data correction.

regulations

and

mechanisms

for

public

Data policy needs to consider the reliability and interoperability of data across sectors at multiple levels. Digital identification should be based on a strong regulatory framework that provides the clear roles and responsibilities of every actor, and more importantly, such frameworks need to emphasize the application of user value and human-led systems. Adaptive policies related to data governance accountability are needed in the context of emergencies. Both the development and deployment of the ID system need to be aware of the potential risks imposed on people, processes, and technology. Thus, five principles are worth the attention in the implementation of the digital ID, namely privacy, security, inclusivity, governance, and accountability. Technology-neutral is the most important tenet in the digital ID where people from diverse backgrounds, especially underserved and underrepresented communities, should have full and meaningful participation in defining the system best for them. Digital rights mainstreaming in every data processing.

Human Rights-based Approach to CBDF ●

Any regulatory attempt on CBDF needs to thoroughly consider the multidimensional nature of data, which includes both economic and non-economic dimensions.



With regard to economic development, unequal distribution of benefits of CBDF which currently is concentrated between a few countries and global tech companies need to be addressed. It is crucial to ensure that the economic value generated by CBDF are able to be reaped by all, including developing countries.



Beyond economic value, from a development lens, the public good nature of data has implications beyond national borders. Health-data sharing for research purposes during the Covid-19 pandemic is one instance in which CBDF can be beneficial.



Furthermore, with regard to its non-economic dimension, CBDF also have its implications towards human rights, particularly privacy. Privacy implications of CBDF vary by data type (commercial data, government data, and consumer data).



Privacy risks come not only from the private sector but also from the public sector, and it affects the trust and hinder potential benefits of a data-driven digital economy. Not only that global standards are urgently needed, but it also need to be accompanied by effective oversight mechanisms that operates independently.

Priority asks and recommendations: Address the inequality of benefits distribution by supporting the capacity of developing countries to develop the policy framework and infrastructure for a data-driven economy. Countries are currently at different levels of readiness in terms of capacity to harness the benefit of cross-border data flow for development. Aaronson (2019a) notes that contributing to the development of data governance frameworks at the global level can be challenging for developing countries, as many are still missing the appropriate norms, rules and regulations, as well as infrastructure, for a data-driven economy. Integrating a human rights-based approach to cross-border data flows. Given its multidimensional nature, it is thus crucial for policymakers to strike a balance between the economic and non-economic aspects. Rather than enforcing a strict data localization policy, it is essential to establish a robust data protection framework, which puts the control over personal data back to individuals as data subjects.

Moreover, it is essential to emphasize that an effective enforcement mechanism to protect the right to privacy is in place, through an independent data protection authority.

Open and Free Knowledge ●









The internet should represent the cultural and linguistic diversity of the world.This is best represented by the internet without barriers to access locally-relevant content in local languages. We see gaps in the access and content creation of women and non-binary people, the LGBTQI+ community, people with disabilities, indigenous peoples, and people of colour. To reflect all the world’s knowledge and achieve knowledge equity, we must ensure participation of all in the bottom-up creation of online knowledge that will enable collaboration. To enjoy open and free knowledge on the internet, freedom of expression needs to be protected. So that all users can express their opinion without fear of reprisals or censorship. In addition, Copyright rules should encourage free expression online, not restrict it. General knowledge in digital applications has a lot to do with access to digital-source code commands. Various forms of data manipulation and other violations that harm society can be done by an application in designing the Source Code they use. Making an escort against potential bias the community becomes inaccessible in the name of trade secrets and intellectual property rights. The case in the corona pandemic post-corona development makes the birth of applications in life activities that do not have certainty of protection against bias, fraud, and anti-justice practices. For this reason, there needs to be a rule that guarantees community protection for application makers against fraudulent application providers.

Priority asks and recommendations: Maintain access to information and support free expression online, particularly during elections, protests, and periods of conflict. Access to the internet is a human right. Intentional disruptions to internet access impact individuals’ economic, social, political, and civil rights. Governments should provide safe-harbor protections for intermediaries, and refrain from banning online platforms. No one should fear any reprisal for the content they contribute online, as the internet should be the platform for collaboration including those from the global south. To enjoy open and free knowledge on the internet, freedom of expression needs to be protected. Copyright solutions should encourage freedom of expression online, not restrict it. Support the principle of net neutrality, and oppose practices that allow service providers to abuse their market power in ways that prevent people from accessing knowledge. Free open source for health and public goods should be free from business interests.

Thank You!