Introduction
The world is undergoing a digital revolution. Such modern technologies as artificial intelligence, big data, smart contracts, distributed registries, etc. are being actively introduced into all spheres of life (Glagolev et al., 2020; Grigorieva and Nikulshin, 2022; Guterres, 2021). Due to the development of information technologies, a new digital reality is being formed that contributes to the transformation of human rights and freedoms (Varlamova, 2019; Zhilenko et al., 2021). The digital environment generates new rights and problems related to confidentiality and privacy (Grigorieva, 2017; Siegel, 1998). Digitalization has created a technological environment where human rights are different from offline human rights, i.e., they are more formalized and require additional guarantees and more effective protection (Kirillova et al., 2021; Langford, 2020).
Digitalization is rapidly developing and entering all spheres of life (Bekezhanov et al., 2021). In the new reality, digital platforms invade privacy (Riekkinen et al., 2019), i.e., collect facts about the personal habits of users to make a profit. For example, government agencies collect personal data and introduce digital services (Gurinovich and Petrykina, 2021; Zhatkanbayeva et al., 2017) which can switch from data collection to the surveillance of citizens. Consequently, the risks of leakage of personal data and their use in fraudulent schemes increase (Neznamova et al., 2020). In such conditions, the problem of protecting the rights of citizens in the digital environment is especially acute (Coccoli, 2017). To protect the rights and freedoms of citizens in networks, it is necessary to first identify the main threats to human rights in the context of digitalization and develop recommendations for their elimination.
This study utilized a desk review and comparative analysis of scientific works on digitalization and human rights. This review included scientific papers from the Scopus and Web of Science databases, as well as media reports, indices related to human rights on the Internet, and sites that have statistical reports on the number of requests and thematic publications. The number of scientific studies on such topics as “digitalization” and “human rights” on the website https://scholar.google.com as of July 16, 2023 was about 177,000. As of July 17, 2023, there were 76,206 results for the keywords “digitalization” and “human rights” on the website https://wordstat.yandex.ru, which proves the relevance of the topic.
In the media, the topic of human rights in the context of digitalization was discussed in more than 24,334 publications in 2023, according to the data taken from https://yandex.ru.
The analysis was performed as a real-time and comprehensive assessment, which is related to access to research and statistics, as well as the nature of virtual assessments.
The study used the following key definitions:
- Digitalization is the use of digital algorithms by entities and citizens in various fields, which leads to the need to reassess legal mechanisms for regulating legal relations in this area;
- Digital transformation is an organizational re-registration of working methods in the economy and society associated with the use of digital technologies;
- Digital human rights are the rights of citizens when using digital technologies and networks.
- The study aims at defining and classifying human rights and freedoms in the digital environment and highlighting the main threats to human rights in the context of digitalization. Meta-analysis embraced 61 works selected from more than 160 scientific papers. For sampling, a wide range of publications was used, according to the type in Scopus, Web of Science, and other citation bases. The new database of selected studies was formed based on the following criteria:
- Papers on the rights and freedoms of citizens in the context of digitalization;
- Papers written between 1998 and 2023;
- The authors must have at least three publications on the topic “rights and freedoms of citizens in the context of digitalization”;
- The selected study should be concerned with human rights in the digital environment.
Based on the study conducted, a classification of specific human rights and freedoms in the context of digitalization was proposed, and the main threats to human rights and freedoms in the digital environment were identified.
Discussion
Digitalization and human rights are closely related concepts (Afanasev, 2017;
Zorkin, 2020). On the one hand, digitalization allows for greater accessibility and ease of use of various services, which contributes to the empowerment of people. On the other hand, digitalization can lead to a violation of human rights if it does not comply with international standards and principles for the protection of human rights. For example, the use of biometric data without the consent of a person may violate their right to privacy (Barton et al., 2016). Therefore, it is important that digital technologies are used with due regard to the rights and interests of a person, and comply with international standards (Chirkov et al., 2022).
Among the fundamental human rights in the digital environment, scholars highlight the first right to access the Internet (Gaivoronskaya et al., 2021). Accordingly, everyone has the right to freely access information and resources located on the Internet. This right can only be limited in conformity with law and security requirements (Cerf, 2012). Not all people have the opportunity to use the Internet, i.e., the poorest population in many countries cannot afford to have smartphones, computers, or laptops. In some remote settlements, there is no Internet, and the digitalization of public life can discriminate against this category of citizens (Szoszkiewicz, 2018). Fundamental human rights are broad, universally applicable rights recognized and protected under international law. Specific human rights, while grounded in these fundamental rights, are more focused on the nuances and specific challenges posed by the digital environment. They provide a detailed framework to address the particular needs and vulnerabilities of individuals in the digital age.
To provide access to the Internet, the state must create and maintain an infrastructure that will allow people to connect to the network. This infrastructure may include cables, communication towers, servers, and other technical devices
(Belyanskaya et al., 2022). To ensure the high quality of the Internet, some countries introduced secured access to broadband Internet (Meskic et al., 2022). In addition, the state must protect the personal data of Internet users, as well as monitor that there is no violation of copyrights and other laws related to the use of the Internet (Brovka et al., 2020). The right to access the Internet is the foundation for building mechanisms for the realization of human rights and freedoms in the digital environment.
Another right in the digital environment, to which experts pay special attention, is the right to search, receive and transmit information on the Internet (Livson et al., 2021; Rayes and Salam, 2019). Internet of things from hype to reality: The road to digitization). According to this right, everyone has the opportunity to freely seek, receive, transmit, and disseminate information, as well as use it for any purpose, without violating existing laws and the rights of others. This right is guaranteed by the constitutions of many countries and international documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, etc. (Heugas, 2021). However, this right may be limited by law in the interests of national security, public order, privacy, morality, etc. (Payan, 2022).
The right to seek and transmit information does not mean that a person can disseminate any information without restrictions. Legislation may establish certain requirements for the content, its form, and methods of distribution to ensure the protection of the rights and freedoms of other people (Smith, 2013). Furthermore, the dissemination of false or harmful information may violate the rights of others and lead to negative consequences. Therefore, it is important to comply with ethical and legal standards when using the Internet (Budanova et al., 2022).
Many scholars dwell on the right to use, create and publish digital works (Hick et al., 2016; Satriawan et al., 2023) which is one of the key rights in the modern world. It guarantees authors and copyright holders the ability to create, distribute and use their works in digital form.
The right to use one’s digital works embraces the right to use such works in any form, including sale, rental, public performance, broadcast, etc. It also includes the right to receive remuneration for the use of one’s works in digital form (Skepys, 2012).
The right to create includes the ability to create works and protect one’s copyright (Lim and Sexton, 2012). This right protects authors from the illegal use of their works without their consent. The right to publish includes the ability to publish works in any format and on any platform. This right guarantees authors the freedom to choose where and how their works will be presented to a wide audience (Brysk, 2002).
The right to privacy is among the basic rights that are guaranteed to a person on the Internet (Hafner-Burton, 2012). It allows users to control their personal information and protect their privacy.
Each user has the right to ensure that their personal information is not transferred to third parties without their consent (Yerkinbayeva et al., 2022). This includes information about bank accounts, credit cards, passport details, medical information, etc. In addition, users have the right not to have their personal data used without their consent for marketing purposes or for other purposes that might harm them (Alston and Goodman, 2013).
To protect their privacy, users opt for various tools and methods. For example, they set passwords for social media accounts, use two-factor authentication, do not publish personal information in the public domain, etc. (Manta, 2021). However, online privacy is not only a matter of security but also a matter of control over one’s data (Donnelly and Whelan, 2020).
The right to anonymity on the Internet is quite controversial as some lawyers claim that the abuse of this right can harm both an individual and society. In other words, this right is ambivalent (Neville, 2017). Anonymity is a right that guarantees the confidentiality of personal data when one is using the Internet. This can be useful for protecting personal information, privacy, and free speech (Beitz, 2009).
Anonymity can be achieved in a variety of ways, including the use of proxy servers, VPNs, the Tor network, and other technologies. However, anonymity is not absolute and can be limited by law or other security measures (Jørgensen, 2018).
Freedom of speech is one of the fundamental human rights. It guarantees everyone the opportunity to freely express their thoughts, ideas, and opinions. On the Internet, this right has its own characteristics since online information is distributed faster and becomes more accessible than in real life (Hick and Halpin, 2001).
Freedom of speech on the Internet means that users have the right to speak on any topic and publish their opinions, articles, videos, photos, etc. (Whaley, 2000). However, freedom of speech does not mean permissiveness and violation of the rights of other people. Therefore, it is necessary to follow the rules of conduct on the Internet to avoid conflicts and violations of the rights of other users.
The main human rights in the digital environment are presented in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Human rights on the Internet
Source: Compiled by authors (2023)
Fundamental human rights are broad, universally applicable rights recognized and protected under international law. Specific human rights, while grounded in these fundamental rights, are more focused on the nuances and specific challenges posed by the digital environment. They provide a detailed framework to address the particular needs and vulnerabilities of individuals in the digital age.
Table 1. Human Rights on the Internet
|
Category
|
Human Rights
|
|
Fundamental Human Rights
|
- Right to access the Internet
|
|
- Right to search, receive, and transmit information
|
|
- Right to use, create, and publish digital works
|
|
- Right to privacy
|
|
- Right to anonymity
|
|
- Right to freedom of speech
|
|
Specific Human Rights
|
- Right to digital sovereignty
|
|
- Right to manage and protect a digital profile
|
|
- Right to protect biometric data
|
|
- Right to withdraw data and the right to be forgotten
|
|
- Right to safety on the Internet
|
Source: Compiled by authors (2023)
On the one hand, digitalization allows for greater accessibility and ease of use of various services, which contributes to the empowerment of people. On the other hand, digitalization can lead to a violation of human rights if it does not comply with international standards and principles for the protection of human rights.
In that case, it is necessary to highlight specific human rights and freedoms in the digital environment:
- The right to ensure digital sovereignty is the right of each person to independently determine what personal information they want to disclose and how to use it (Belli and De Filippi, 2015). For example, a person may choose to have their personal information only available to themselves or those close to them or to make it publicly available. They can also choose what data will be included in the profile on social networks or other online platforms, and how it will be used (Tully, 2014). Ensuring the digital sovereignty of each person is an important step in protecting their rights and freedoms in the digital age (McIver et al., 2003).
- The right to dispose of a digital profile and protect digital identity is the ability of a person to manage their personal data in the digital space, as well as to protect their digital identity from unauthorized use and disclosure (Brkan et al., 2020). This right includes the ability to create and manage a digital profile (Mihr, 2017). A person can create their digital profile, add information about themselves, edit it, and delete it.
- The right to protect biometric personal data is one of the important human rights in the digital age (Shandler and Canetti, 2019). Biometric data are unique characteristics of a person, such as fingerprints, voice, face, eye shape, etc., that can be used to identify an individual (Eigenstetter, 2020). In this regard, the right to the protection of personal data includes protection against the misuse of biometric data, as well as against their theft or leakage. This right protects a person from the undesirable consequences associated with the use of their biometric data without their consent or without following the relevant rules and procedures (Wicker and Santoso, 2013).
Various technologies are used to protect biometric data, such as biometric authentication, biometric encryption, and biometric security (Carr, 2013). There are also laws and rules that regulate the use of biometric data and establish liability for their violation. Thus, the right to protect biometric personal data is an important tool for ensuring security and privacy in the digital environment (Schelenz and Schopp, 2018).
- The right to withdraw data and the right to be forgotten are two important aspects of personal data protection in the digital space. Data withdrawal is the process of removing personal data from the databases of companies and organizations (Mathiesen, 2012). This allows the user to revoke their consent to the processing of personal data and request that they be permanently deleted from the databases.
Digital oblivion is a procedure for deleting information from search engines and other databases, which allows the user to delete their personal data from open sources without the possibility of their recovery (Zalnieriute and Milan, 2019). Both rights ensure the protection of the user’s personal data and allow them to control their data in the digital space.
The right to safety on the Internet is the right to be protected from illegal acts, information and psychological manipulation, and negative social consequences (Best, 2004). Each person shall be protected from possible digital threats in the digital environment (Brophy and Halpin, 1999). To attain this end, there are many mechanisms, such as antivirus programs, firewalls, and other protection tools.
Experts emphasize the legal insecurity of an individual and highlight the main threats to human rights and freedoms in the context of digitalization (Lucchi, 2014; Reglitz, 2020; Vasilev et al., 2020). The main threats to human rights are the research object of many scholars. Table 2 below presents the main threats and authors who singled out one or another type of threat.
Table 2. Main threats to the rights of citizens in the digital environment
|
Main threats to human rights in the context of digitalization
|
Authors who identified the main threats to human rights in the context of digitalization
|
|
1. Violation of the right to privacy when processing personal data in the digital environment
|
A. Guterres (2021), N.V. Varlamova (2019), J. Coccoli (2017), A. Pūraitė, R. Adamonienė, A. Žemeckė (2020), L. Amelicheva, O. Martyniuk, I. Pyroha, C. Qaracayev, V. Myroshnychenko (2021), M. McAuliffe, J. Blower, A. Beduschi (2021), D.S. Obloberdievna and R.B. Rustamovna (2022), D. Burchardt and M. Varaki (2023), E.O. Tchinaryan, E.S. Kuchenin, V.L. Slesarev, A.V. Ryzhik (2021), O.V. Belyanskaya, J.A. Kazanovskaya, T.A. Strutinskaya (2022), M. Livson, S. Eshtokin, V. Vasyukov, E. Yudina, A. Baybarin, S. Pivneva (2021).
|
|
2. Cyber-attacks by hackers
|
G.M. Brovka, I.N. Kandrichina, O.V. Veremeychik (2020), M. Langford (2020), A.T. Karasev, O.A. Kozhevnikov, V.A. Misuraginа (2019), V.D. Zorkin (2020), L. Schelenz and K. Schopp (2018), A. Barton, P.J. Bracke, A.M. Clark (2016), J. Nida-Rümelin and N. Weidenfeld (2022), L. Budanova, O. Mikhailova, B. Kazak (2022), G. Payan (2022), M. Eigenstetter (2020).
|
|
3. Acts of aggression directed against a person (trolling, cyberbullying, etc.)
|
Y.V. Gaivoronskaya, A.Y. Mamychev, D.A. Petrova, O.R. Dashkovska (2021), M. Brkan, M. Claes, C. Rauchegger (2020), A.C. Heugas (2021), Z. Meskic, M. Albakjaji, N. Jevremovic, E. Omerovic, J. Adams (2022), L. Yerkinbayeva, D. Nurmukhankyzy, B. Kalymbek, A. Ozenbayeva, Z. Kalymbekova (2022), O. Manta (2021), V.L. Vasilev, A.R. Gapsalamov, E.M. Akhmetshin, T.N. Bochkareva, A.V. Yumashev, T.I. Anisimova (2020).
|
|
4. Disinformation in networks, including using DeepFake technologies
|
A. Rayes and S. Salam (2019), S. Hick, E. Halpin, E. Hoskins (2016), M. Reglitz (2020), B. Skepys (2012), D. Joyce (2015), M.L. Best (2004), N. Lucchi (2014), M.L. Siegel (1998), S. Tully (2014), Ł. Szoszkiewicz (2018).
|
|
5. Information warfare to rule over mass consciousness, attempts to take networks under complete control
|
V.G. Cerf (2012), P. Brophy and E. Halpin (1999), M. Zalnieriute and S. Milan, (2019), M. Carr (2013), K. Mathiesen (2012), S.B. Wicker and S.M. Santoso (2013), R. Shandler and D. Canetti (2019), R.F. Jørgensen (2018), A, Mihr (2017).
|
|
6. New ways of monitoring and control based on the collection and analysis of data that influence the decision-making of citizens
|
L. Belli and P. De Filippi (2015), Y.J. Lim and S.E. Sexton (2012), W.J. McIver, W.F. Birdsall, M. Rasmussen (2003), P. Whaley (2000), P.S. Smith (2013).
|
|
7. Fraudulent activities in the digital environment
|
A. Neville (2017), S. Hick and E. Halpin (2001), I. Satriawan, T.M.A. Elven, T. Lailam (2023), J. Kulesza (2012), C.R. Beitz (2009), J. Donnelly and D.J. Whelan (2020), P. Alston and R. Goodman (2013), E.M. Hafner-Burton (2012), A. Brysk (2002).
|
Source: Compiled by authors (2023)
However, there are more risks that need to be highlighted. A large array of digital data is collected and circulated in a gray legal zone, i.e., huge amounts of personal information about citizens are collected by digital platforms without citizens’ awareness of the fact of collection. This information is repeatedly copied and used for various purposes like advertising, surveillance, or manipulation (Kulesza, 2012). In addition, there is a new method of gathering personal data by indirect signs and entering them into a digital citizen profile (Pūraitė et al., 2020). Using information about purchases, communication, and personal messages, digital platforms can form a personal user profile (identification tools are able to attribute the calculated data and link them to a specific citizen, i.e., their smartphone, Wi-Fi network, place of work, which provides opportunities for discrimination, blackmailing, etc. (Barton et al., 2016). At the legislative level, it is necessary to prohibit the use of systems for identifying personal data by indirect signs that are contained in big data to prevent the breach of personal data (Amelicheva et al., 2021).
There is also a risk of digital corruption due to the ease of committing crimes and hiding their traces. The personal data of citizens in digital format have become a commodity that brings considerable profits (McAuliffe et al., 2021).
The digital environment increases the possibility of corruption as it allows to effectively hide traces, erase documents, and pay for criminal services anonymously in a cross-border format, for example, using bitcoins (Obloberdievna and Rustamovna, 2022). The introduction of artificial intelligence that makes decisions in lending, hiring, and competition helps corrupt officials sell services to improve ratings, while the decisions made by artificial intelligence are absolutized and not subject to revision (Burchardt and Varaki, 2023). Therefore, it is necessary to introduce a ban on the use of social rating systems to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens in the digital environment and, therefore prevent digital discrimination of citizens.
A social rating system is a mechanism that evaluates and assigns scores to individuals based on their behavior, activities, and interactions within digital and physical environments. These systems collect data from various sources, such as social media, financial transactions, online behavior, and public records, to create a comprehensive profile of an individual’s social credit. The most notable example is China’s Social Credit System, which rates citizens on parameters including their online behavior, financial creditworthiness, and social conduct. However social rating systems require the collection and analysis of large amounts of personal data, raising significant privacy concerns. Individuals may have their private activities monitored and evaluated without explicit consent.
The active introduction of electronic document management creates the risk of losing these documents. In addition, digital documents are subject to leakage, theft, and distortion due to the ease of replication (Tchinaryan et al., 2021). As practice shows, digital documents live no more than 20 years since the previous format for storing digital information quickly becomes obsolete and documents become unreadable (Karasev et al., 2019). The digital storage of documents has proved that it is difficult to ensure the safety of data due to software failures, emergencies, and project closures, for example, the destruction of millions of websites during the closure of GeoCities hosting (Nida-Rümelin and Weidenfeld, 2022). To store documents in a digital format, the state needs to provide an expensive procedure of permanent backup. In addition, digital documents increase the risk of fraudulent activities, which is especially dangerous in relation to birth certificates, death certificates, diseases, marital status, education, etc. Therefore, it is necessary to preserve the electronic-paper workflow, recognizing the document on paper as the original.
The term “document on paper as the original” refers to the legal recognition that the paper version of a document is considered the authoritative and legally binding version, particularly in cases where authenticity and originality are crucial. This concept is based on the idea that paper documents can be physically verified and are less susceptible to certain types of fraud compared to digital documents. However, it does not imply that paper documents are immune to falsification or modification. Instead, it highlights the challenges in ensuring the integrity and authenticity of digital documents, which can be more easily altered without detection.
Conclusion
Based on the study results, human rights in the digital environment have been identified and classified. The basic human rights are as follows: the right to access the Internet; the right to search, receive, and transfer information; the right to use, create, and publish digital works; the right to privacy on the Internet; the right to anonymity; the right to freedom of speech in the digital environment. Specific human rights include the right to ensure digital sovereignty, the right to manage a digital profile and protect digital identity, the right to protect biometric personal data, the right to recall data and the right to be forgotten, and the right to safety on the Internet.
In the context of digitalization, we highlighted and considered the following threats to the rights and freedoms of citizens: violation of the right to privacy when processing personal data in a digital environment; cyber-attacks by hackers; acts of aggression directed against a person (trolling, cyberbullying, etc.); misinformation in the network, including the use of DeepFake technologies; information warfare to rule over mass consciousness, attempts to take networks under complete control; new ways of monitoring and control based on the collection and analysis of data that influence the decision-making of citizens; fraudulent activity in the digital environment; the collection and circulation of digital personal data without awareness of the fact of collection and not regulated by law; gathering of personal data by indirect signs; digital corruption.
Considering the main threats to human rights and freedoms, legal regulation should aim at protecting the rights of citizens in the digital environment. Given the danger of digitization of personal documents, it is necessary to preserve paper documents and recognize a document on paper as the original. To protect the rights and freedoms of citizens in the context of digitalization, it is advisable to prohibit the creation and use of social rating systems that pose a threat to the realization of the rights and freedoms of citizens. It is also necessary to introduce a ban on the use of systems for identifying personal data by indirect signs that are contained in big data, which will prevent the calculation of personal data.
References
Afanasev, M.V. (2017). Ugolovno-pravovaya kharakteristika narushenii pravil dorozhnogo dvizheniya litsom, podvergnutym administrativnomu nakazaniyu [Criminal-legal characteristics of violations of traffic rules by a person subjected to administrative punishment]. Legal Bulletin, 2(2), 6-17.
Alston, P., Goodman, R. (2013). International human rights. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Amelicheva, L., Martyniuk, O., Pyroha, I., Qaracayev, C., Myroshnychenko, V. (2021). Implementation of constitutional human rights and social guarantees of security in the context of digitalization. Revista Amazonia Investiga, 10(45), 265-271. http://dx.doi.org/10.34069/AI/2021.45.09.26
Barton, A., Bracke, P.J., Clark, A.M. (2016). Digitization, data curation, and human rights documents: Case study of a library-researcher-practitioner collaboration. IASSIST Quarterly, 40(1), 27. http://dx.doi.org/10.29173/iq625
Beitz, C.R. (2009). The idea of human rights. New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press.
Bekezhanov, D., Kopbassarova, G., Rzabay, A., Nessipbayeva, I., Aktymbayev, K. (2021). Еnvironmental and legal regulation of digitalization of environmental protection. Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism, 12(7), 1941-1950. https://doi.org/10.14505/jemt.12.7(55).19
Belli, L., De Filippi, P., (Eds.). (2015). Net neutrality compendium: Human rights, free competition and the future of the Internet. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26425-7
Belyanskaya, O.V., Kazanovskaya, J.A., Strutinskaya, T.A. (2022). Updating human rights and freedoms in a digitalizing society. In E.G. Popkova (Ed.), Business 4.0 as a subject of the digital economy. Advances in science, technology & innovation (P. 225-228). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90324-4_37
Best, M.L. (2004). Can the Internet be a human right? Human Rights & Human Welfare, 4(1), 13.
Brkan, M., Claes, M., Rauchegger, C. (2020). European fundamental rights and digitalization. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 27(6), 697-704. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1023263X20983778
Brophy, P., Halpin, E. (1999). Through the net to freedom: Information, the Internet and human rights. Journal of information science, 25(5), 351-364.
Brovka, G.M., Kandrichina, I.N., Veremeychik, O.V. (2020). The institute of intellectual property in the context of digitalization while ensuring innovative security and human rights. Journal of the Belarusian State University. International Relations, 1, 19-24.
Brysk, A., (Ed.) (2002). Globalization and human rights. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA, USA; London, UK: University of California Press.
Budanova, L., Mikhailova, O., Kazak, B. (2022). Realization of human rights and freedoms when checking a crime report, taking into account digitalization. SHS Web of Conferences, 141(7), 02002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202214102002
Burchardt, D., Varaki, M. (2023). Editorial to the special issue “The impact of digitalization on international law”. German Law Journal, 24(3), 435-437. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/glj.2023.32
Carr, M. (2013). Internet freedom, human rights and power. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 67(5), 621-637. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10357718.2013.817525
Cerf, V.G. (2012). Internet access is not a human right. New York Times, 4, 25-26.
Chirkov, D., Plohih, G., Kapustina, D., Vasyukov, V. (2022). Opportunities for using digital data in evidence for criminal cases. Revista Juridica, 4(71), 364-380.
Coccoli, J. (2017). The challenges of new technologies in the implementation of human rights: An analysis of some critical issues in the digital era. Peace Human Rights Governance, 1(2), 223-250. http://dx.doi.org/10.14658/pupj-phrg-2017-2-4
Donnelly, J., Whelan, D.J. (2020). International human rights. New York, NY, USA: Routledge.
Eigenstetter, M. (2020). Ensuring trust in and acceptance of digitalization and automation: Contributions of human factors and ethics. In V. Duffy (Ed.), Digital human modeling and applications in health, safety, ergonomics and risk management. Human communication, organization and work. HCII 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 12199, P. 254-266). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49907-5_18
Gaivoronskaya, Y.V., Mamychev, A.Y., Petrova, D.A., Dashkovska, O.R. (2021). Transformation of human rights under the influence of digitalization. Revista San Gregorio, 1(44), 27-37.
Glagolev, S.N., Buhonova, S.M., Sidorin, Y.M. (2020). The realization of joint Russian-Serbia innovative projects in the regions. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 753(7), 072016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/753/7/072016
Grigorieva, O. (2017). Constitutional basis for international cooperation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Giornale Di Storia Costituzionale, 33(1), 109-120.
Grigorieva, O., Nikulshin, A. (2022). Electric buses on the streets of Moscow: Experience, problems, prospects. Transportation Research Procedia, 63, 670-675. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2022.06.061
Gurinovich, A.G., Petrykina, N.I. (2021). Características del desarrollo de la Institución de Servicio Público: Experiencia Internacional y su aplicación en Rusia [Specifics of developing the institution of public service: International experience and its application in Russia]. Jurídicas CUC, 17(1), 253-276. https://doi.org/10.17981/juridcuc.17.1.2021.09
Guterres, A. (2021). The UN Secretary-General on the global digitalization and international cooperation. Digital Law Journal, 2(2), 10-13. https://doi.org/10.38044/2686-9136-2021-2-2-10-13
Hafner-Burton, E.M. (2012). International regimes for human rights. Annual Review of Political Science, 15, 265-286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-031710-114414
Heugas, A.C. (2021). Protecting image rights in the face of digitalization: A United States and European analysis. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 24(5-6), 344-367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12194
Hick, S., Halpin, E. (2001). Children’s rights and the Internet. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 575(1), 56-70.
Hick, S., Halpin, E., Hoskins, E., (Eds.) (2016). Human rights and the Internet. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Jørgensen, R.F. (2018). Framing human rights: Exploring storytelling within internet companies. Information, Communication & Society, 21(3), 340-355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1289233
Joyce, D. (2015). Internet freedom and human rights. European Journal of International Law, 26(2), 493-514. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chv021
Karasev, A.T., Kozhevnikov, O.A., Misuraginа, V.A. (2019). Digitalization of legal relations and its impact on the implementation of certain constitutional rights of citizens in the Russian Federation. Antinomii, 19(3), 99-119. https://doi.org/10.24411/2686-7206-2019-00005
Kirillova, E.A., Zulfugarzade, T.E., Blinkov, O.E., Serova, O.A., Mikhaylova, I.A. (2021). Perspectivas de desarrollo de la regulación legal de las plataformas digitales [Prospects for developing the legal regulation of digital platforms]. Jurídicas CUC, 18(1), 35-52. https://doi.org/10.17981/juridcuc.18.1.2022.02
Kulesza, J. (2012). International internet law. Global Change, Peace & Security, 24(3), 351-364. https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2012.716417
Langford, M. (2020). Taming the digital leviathan: Automated decision-making and international human rights. American Journal of International Law, 114, 141-146. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/aju.2020.31
Lim, Y.J., Sexton, S.E. (2012). Internet as a human right: A practical legal framework to address the unique nature of the medium and to promote development. Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts, 7(3), 295-318.
Livson, M., Eshtokin, S., Vasyukov, V., Yudina, E., Baybarin, A., Pivneva, S. (2021). Impact of digitalization on legal regulation: Formation of new legal practices. Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, 9(2), e0749. http://dx.doi.org/10.37497/sdgs.v9i2.28
Lucchi, N. (2014). Internet content governance and human rights. Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law, 16(4), 809-856.
Manta, O. (2021). Human rights and the role of higher education and intellectuals in the context of digitalization. Jurnalul Libertății de Conștiință, 9(3), 444-474.
Mathiesen, K. (2012). The human right to Internet access: A philosophical defense. The International Review of Information Ethics, 18, 9-22. https://doi.org/10.29173/irie299
McAuliffe, M., Blower, J., Beduschi, A. (2021). Digitalization and artificial intelligence in migration and mobility: Transnational implications of the COVID-19 pandemic. Societies, 11(4), 135. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc11040135
McIver, W.J., Birdsall, W.F., Rasmussen, M. (2003). The Internet and the right to communicate. First Monday, 8(12). http://dx.doi.org/10.5210/fm.v8i12.1102
Meskic, Z., Albakjaji, M., Jevremovic, N., Omerovic, E., Adams, J. (2022). Digitalization and innovation in achieving SDGs–Impacts on legislation and practice. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1026(1), 012061. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1026/1/012061
Mihr, A. (2017). Cyber justice: Human rights and good governance for the internet. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Neville, A. (2017). Is it a human right to be forgotten: Conceptualizing the world view. Santa Clara Journal of International Law, 15(2), 157-172.
Neznamova, A., Kuleshov, G. & Turkin, M. (2020). Experiencia internacional en proteccion de datos personales [International experience in personal data protection]. Jurídicas CUC, 16(1), 391–406. http://dx.doi.org/10.17981/juridcuc.16.1.2020.17
Nida-Rümelin, J., Weidenfeld, N. (2022). Cultural aspects of digitalization. In Digital humanism: For a humane transformation of democracy, economy and culture in the digital age (P. 81-86). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-12482-2_15
Obloberdievna, D.S., Rustamovna, R.B. (2022). Digitalization as the only safe learning option during the Covid-19 pandemic. Journal of Intellectual Property and Human Rights, 1(11), 70-73.
Payan, G. (2022). Prava cheloveka i tsifrovizatsiia pravosudiia [Human rights and the digitalization of justice]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa [Herald of Civil Procedure], 12(2), 165-181.
Pūraitė, A., Adamonienė, R., Žemeckė, A. (2020). Sustainable digitalization in public institutions: Challenges for human rights. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 9(3), 91-102. http://dx.doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2020.v9n3p91
Rayes, A., Salam, S. (2019). Internet of things from hype to reality: The road to digitization. Cham, Switzerland: Spinger.
Reglitz, M. (2020). The human right to free internet access. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 37(2), 314-331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/japp.12395
Riekkinen, M., Adilghazi, S., Tasbulatova, A. (2019). Protected or neglected? Analyzing legislation governing minors’ participation in protest rallies in Russia against the background of international law. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 27(3), 482-516. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718182-02703004
Satriawan, I., Elven, T.M.A., Lailam, T. (2023). Internet shutdown in Indonesia: An appropriate response or a threat to human rights? Sriwijaya Law Review, 7(1), 19-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.28946/slrev.Vol7.Iss1.1018.pp19-46
Schelenz, L., Schopp, K. (2018). Digitalization in Africa: Interdisciplinary perspectives on technology, development, and justice. International Journal of Digital Society, 9(4), 1412-1420. http://dx.doi.org/10.20533/ijds.2040.2570.2018.0175
Shandler, R., Canetti, D. (2019). A reality of vulnerability and dependence: Internet access as a human right. Israel Law Review, 52(1), 77-98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0021223718000262
Siegel, M.L. (1998). Hate speech, civil rights, and the Internet: The jurisdictional and human rights nightmare. Albany Law Journal of Science & Technology, 9, 375-398.
Skepys, B. (2012). Is there a human right to the Internet. Journal of Politics and Law, 5(4), 15-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jpl.v5n4p15
Smith, P.S. (2013). Imprisonment and Internet-access–human rights, the principle of normalization and the question of prisoners’ access to digital communications technology. Nordic Journal of Human Rights, 30(4), 454-482.
Szoszkiewicz, Ł. (2018). Internet access as a new human right? State of the art on the threshold of 2020. Przegląd Prawniczy Uniwersytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza, 8, 49-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/ppuam.2018.8.03
Tchinaryan, E.O., Kuchenin, E.S., Slesarev, V.L., Ryzhik, A.V. (2021). Human rights in the age of digitalization. Laplage em Revista, 7(2), 119-125.
Tully, S. (2014). A human right to access the Internet? Problems and prospects. Human Rights Law Review, 14(2), 175-195.
Varlamova, N.V. (2019). Digital rights–new generation of human rights. Proceedings of the Institute of State and Law of the RAS, 14(4), 9-46.
Vasilev, V.L., Gapsalamov, A.R., Akhmetshin, E.M., Bochkareva, T.N., Yumashev, A.V., Anisimova, T.I. (2020). Digitalization peculiarities of organizations: A case study. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 7(4), 3173-3190. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2020.7.4(39)
Whaley, P. (2000). Human rights NGOs: Our love-hate relationship with the Internet. In S. Hick, E.F. Halpin, E. Hoskins (Eds.), Human rights and the Internet (P. 30-40). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780333977705_4
Wicker, S.B., Santoso, S.M. (2013). Access to the internet is a human right. Communications of the ACM, 56(6), 43-46.
Yerkinbayeva, L., Nurmukhankyzy, D., Kalymbek, B., Ozenbayeva, A., Kalymbekova, Z. (2022). Digitalization of environmental information in the Republic of Kazakhstan: Issues of legal regulation. Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism, 13(1), 115-127. https://doi.org/10.14505/jemt.v13.1(57).10
Zalnieriute, M., Milan, S. (2019). Internet architecture and human rights: Beyond the human rights gap. Policy & Internet, 11(1), 6-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/poi3.200
Zhatkanbayeva, A., Tuyakbayeva, N., Jangabulova, A., Tasbulatova, A., Adilgazy, S. (2017). Review on legal issues of socially vulnerable groups of population (old people, children, etc.). Ponte, 73(5), 211-222. http://dx.doi.org/10.21506/j.ponte.2017.5.46
Zhilenko, V.Y., Amirova, E.F., Lomakin, D.E., Smoktal, N.N., Khamkhoeva, F.Y. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the global economy and environment. Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism, 12(5), 1236-1241. https://doi.org/10.14505//jemt.v12.5(53).08
Zorkin, V.D. (2020). Providentia or about the law of the future in the era of digitalization. Gosudarstvo i pravo, 6, 7-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.31857/S013207690009932-7
FINANCING
There is no funding for this work.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
CONTRIBUTION AND CREDIT
- Conceptualization, ideas, and the evolution of the design of the work: “ALEXANDER PETROV”.
- Obtaining, reviewing, and analyzing the data or categories: “ALSU MIRZAGITOVA”.
- Writing and presentation of the article: “ELENA KIRILLOVA”.
- Critical review of the content of the manuscript: “ALEXEY KURAEV”.
BIODATA
Aleksander Petrov. Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor, Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Russia. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9648-3278
Alsu Mirzagitova. Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor, Kazan Federal University, Russia. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9566-275X.
Alexey Kuraev. Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, K.G. Razumovsky Moscow State University of Technologies and Management (The First Cossack University), Russia. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7771-3701.
Elena Kirillova. Candidate of legal Sciences, associate Professor. Department of civil law, Southwest State University, Russia. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7137-901X.
