» ISP News » 

UN Human Rights Council Warns UK Over Internet Censorship and Privacy

Wednesday, January 11th, 2017 (3:10 pm) - Score 1,552
banned and forbidden uk internet censorship

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has today joined ISPs, civil rights groups and others to warn that the UK’s new Digital Economy Bill 2017 lacks “data sharing safeguards” and may damage the vital “right to privacy and the right to freedom of expression.”

The forthcoming bill contains, among many other things, new measures that are designed to protect children by preventing them from being able to access pornographic content online. Originally the idea was simply to protect the optional network-level filtering systems (Parental Controls) that all of the major broadband ISPs already offer to their customers, which had recently come under threat because of the EU’s new Net Neutrality legislation.

All of this was fine, until the bill was suddenly amended to introduce a much stricter set of rules (here and here). As part of that the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) would effectively be given the power to force Internet Service Providers (ISP) into restricting access to pornographic sites that fail to put “tough age verification measures” in place. However the new approach suffered a number of crucial problems.

Some Key Problems with DEBill Age Verification / Censorship

1. The government focused a lot of its political effort on the word “pornography” in order to win favour with parents, but in the legislation their definition of “adult content” is somewhat more open to interpretation and would perhaps set a dangerous precedent with the threat of mission creep.

2. Speaking of mission creep, several Lords have already suggested that the bill may also cover naughty pictures / videos and “abusive behaviour” that get posted to hugely popular social media websites, such as Twitter (here). A block of Twitter would make the UK look utterly ridiculous. What’s next, blocking Google (e.g. when its Safe Search feature is disabled)?

3. As usual, anybody who wanted to get around such ISP imposed blocks would have no trouble doing so (e.g. VPN, Proxies, HTTPS, DNS changes etc.).

4. The blocks would also apply to websites that exist outside of the UK. Where websites originate in the EU the process will be “compatible with country of origin rules“, which is interesting because most EU states tend to be a lot less puritanical than the UK has recently become.

5. Nobody knows quite how to make an Age Verification system that works, ideally without forcing people to share their private personal and or financial details with unreliable porn peddlers or other “adult sites” (as well as possibly the Government). The infamous ‘Ashley Madison‘ hack showed just how dangerous such information can be in the wrong hands (multiple cases of blackmail and suicide etc.).

6. The cost of implementing such a system isn’t such a huge issue for the big ISPs, but smaller providers could struggle (network-level filtering is neither cheap nor easy). Some ISPs may try to get around this because they already require customers to be over the age of 18.

7. It’s very easy to forget that most adults, usually those without children, don’t want to censor adult websites (here) and indeed a large proportion of adults do access porn online (here).

In keeping with this the United Nations special rapporteur for the protection of human rights and freedom of expression, David Kaye, on Monday wrote an Open Letter to the Government of the United Kingdom that expressed many similar concerns.

For example, Mr Kaye notes the potential use or abuse of private personal data (e.g. your sexual habits and the threat from hacking of related databases), as well as the lack of safeguards to protect such data and the absence of judicial oversight for website blocking (i.e. to prevent poor censorship decisions and to retain independence from politicians / commercial firms).

Finally Mr Kaye expressed “concern at the cumulative effect” of both the DEBill and the new Investigatory Powers Act (IPAct). The latter recently became law and aims to force broadband ISPs into logging a much bigger slice of your Internet activity, irrespective of whether or not you’re even suspected of a crime (here); mind you the latter may be in a spot of trouble (here).

David Kaye said:

“Therefore, while I am cognizant of the need to protect children against harmful content, I am concerned that the provisions under the bill are not an effective way for achieving this objective as they fall short of the standards of international human rights law. The bill contains insufficient procedures without adequate oversight, overly broad definitions and lack of data sharing safeguards that unduly interferes with the rights of freedom of expression and privacy.”

We assume that at this point Mr Kaye stretched out his arm and dropped a microphone, but that probably didn’t happen. Instead he has merely called on the Government to conduct a “comprehensive review” of the new bill to ensure its compliance with international human rights law, which we suspect they’ll probably ignore.

Well if China, Iran, Syria and other states can ignore such things then why not us too? Pesky human rights, down with this sort of filth.. won’t somebody please think of the children etc.


Speaking of the IPAct, Liberty is launching a crowd-funded legal challenge to the law and you can get involved (here).

Share with Twitter
Share with Linkedin
Share with Facebook
Share with Reddit
Share with Pinterest
Mark Jackson
By Mark Jackson
Mark is a professional technology writer, IT consultant and computer engineer from Dorset (England), he also founded ISPreview in 1999 and enjoys analysing the latest telecoms and broadband developments. Find me on Twitter, , Facebook and Linkedin.
Leave a Comment
5 Responses
  1. Avatar Ignition

    Claire Perry and the rest of the God Squad have been after this for a while. Looks like she, and they, are finally getting their way in imposing their puritan ideals on the rest of us.

    • Avatar Ignition

      Claire is so popular that she, an MP, has a protected Twitter account.

      She’s been at this since 2010, chairing a group of religious MPs in their attempt to impose their illiberal values based on illogical beliefs on the rest of us.

  2. Avatar cyclope

    May the traitor wanted the IPbill snoopers charter nonsense and the pig shagger ex PM was the one who Ok’d the ant porn rubbish

  3. Avatar Chris

    Well, in theory I am not against protecting young children from inappropriate content. Not sure that I would extend that late teenagers though, 18 is a bit of a silly age. As for restricting adults, that is just not acceptable. I don’t see why the current system of user driven blocking of adult site at the ISP level is not good enough with perhaps more education.

    Anyway the proposed measures are easy to circumvent as I am sure teenagers will discover so this is rather pointless.


  4. Avatar Peter

    Well for a start Twitter is already banned in China and I don’t recall the Chinese government is regarded as being utterly ridiculous.

    Secondly if the UN rights whatever are upset by this then wait for the next proposal already mooted by the EU (well there’s a surprise).
    The EU’s digital commissioner wants us all to log into this and other comment sites such as Youtube and the rest with Government issued ID’s cards.
    So that means we will all be posting in our real names.
    Man, the UN rights council will go berserk.

    The world is changing and with it the web. As usual with just about anything, wrecked for the majority by the activities of the minority.
    So look forward to web activity being heavily controlled in the future.

Comments RSS Feed

Javascript must be enabled to post (most browsers do this automatically)

Privacy Notice: Please note that news comments are anonymous, which means that we do NOT require you to enter any real personal details to post a message. By clicking to submit a post you agree to storing your comment content, display name, IP, email and / or website details in our database, for as long as the post remains live.

Only the submitted name and comment will be displayed in public, while the rest will be kept private (we will never share this outside of ISPreview, regardless of whether the data is real or fake). This comment system uses submitted IP, email and website address data to spot abuse and spammers. All data is transferred via an encrypted (https secure) session.

NOTE 1: Sometimes your comment might not appear immediately due to site cache (this is cleared every few hours) or it may be caught by automated moderation / anti-spam.

NOTE 2: Comments that break our rules, spam, troll or post via known fake IP/proxy servers may be blocked or removed.
Cheapest Superfast ISPs
  • Hyperoptic £19.95 (*22.00)
    Avg. Speed 50Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: £50 Gift Card
  • Post Office £20.90 (*37.00)
    Avg. Speed 38Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • SSE £22.00
    Avg. Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited (FUP)
    Gift: None
  • xln telecom £22.74 (*47.94)
    Avg. Speed 66Mbps, Unlimited (FUP)
    Gift: None
  • Vodafone £22.95
    Avg. Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
Prices inc. Line Rental | View All
The Top 20 Category Tags
  1. BT (2649)
  2. FTTP (2456)
  3. FTTC (1722)
  4. Building Digital UK (1662)
  5. Politics (1539)
  6. Openreach (1510)
  7. Business (1322)
  8. FTTH (1230)
  9. Statistics (1151)
  10. Mobile Broadband (1127)
  11. Fibre Optic (1019)
  12. Ofcom Regulation (972)
  13. 4G (972)
  14. Wireless Internet (970)
  15. Virgin Media (932)
  16. EE (647)
  17. Sky Broadband (638)
  18. TalkTalk (617)
  19. Vodafone (598)
  20. 3G (437)
Helpful ISP Guides and Tips

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms , Privacy and Cookie Policy , Links , Website Rules , Contact