Implementation of Information and Communication Technology for Human Rights Awareness and Promotion

Gajendra Sharma


Information Technologies (ITs) are highly useful for human rights promotion globally. Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) have proved an influential tool in the fight against violations of human rights. ICT has long represented a way to strengthen human rights. Technology also means that individuals’ human rights are exposed to unprecedented risks, caused by the transition of these rights to the digital field. If we observe the different revolutions around the world, especially in countries that have had autocracy for a long period of time, they have been overruled with the help of ICTs. An analysis of the role of ICTs in human rights has been conducted. According to the study, Information and Communication Technology (ICT) play a critical role in raising awareness of and preventing violations of human rights for global citizens.


Doi: 10.28991/HIJ-2020-01-01-05

Full Text: PDF


Information Technology; Human Rights; Internet.


Technology and Human Rights. (2019). The social and cultural implications of information & communication technology (ICT) on human rights, humanitarian action, and social change. Available online: (accessed on May 2019).

Eliot, N. (2010). The use of ICT in Human Rights promotion: A case study of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Available online: (accessed on May 2019).

United Nations, (2012c). Human Rights Council Resolution 20/8, Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development, A/HRC/RES/20/8 (16 July 2012). Available online: (accessed on January 2017).

United Nations, Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights. (2019). Concept Note for the United Nations Forum on Business and Human Rights, Geneva, 25-27 November 2019. Available online: eighth-annual-forum-on-business-and-human-rights-geneva-25-27-nov-2019 (accessed on October 2019).

Kerikmäe, T., Hoffmann, T., & Chochia, A. (2018). Legal Technology for Law Firms: Determining Roadmaps for Innovation. Croatian International Relations Review, 24(81), 91–112. doi:10.2478/cirr-2018-0005.

Karanasiou, A. P. (2012) ‘Respecting Context: A New Deal for Free Speech in the Digital Era’, European Journal of Law and Technology, Corpus ID: 9958570, 3(3), 1-38.

Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2010). Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly, 27(3), 264–271. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2010.03.001.

Jong, F. de, & Lent, L. van. (2016). The Presumption of Innocence as a Counterfactual Principle. Utrecht Law Review, 12(1), 32. doi:10.18352/ulr.324.

Beitz, C. R. (2011). The idea of human rights. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199572458.001.0001.

European Union. (2016). European Parliament and Council Regulation 2016/679/EU, The protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), 2016 O. J. L 119.

Chapman, A. R. (2009). Towards an Understanding of the Right to Enjoy the Benefits of Scientific Progress and Its Applications. Journal of Human Rights, 8(1), 1–36. doi:10.1080/14754830802701200.

United Nations, (2011a) Human Right Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, A/HRC/17/27, (May 2011). Available online: hrcouncil/docs/ 17session/A. HRC.17.27_en.pdf (accessed on 3 January 2017).

Graber, D. A., & Dunaway, J. (2017). Mass media and American politics. CQ Press, Washington, D.C., United States.

Lloyd, I. (2017). Information technology law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Bauman, Z. (2012). Collateral Damage: social inequalities in a global age. Cambridge; Malden: Polity Press. 15(2), 235. doi:10.3917/mana.152.0235.

Freedom House. (2012). Freedom on the Net 2012. Washington, D.C., United States. Available online: (accessed on October 2019).

Mashable Inc. (2011). One Twitter User Reports Live from Osama Bin Laden Raid. Available online: (accessed on December 2019).

Glasius, M. (2018). What authoritarianism is, and is not: a practice perspective. International Affairs, 94(3), 515–533. doi:10.1093/ia/iiy060.

Costea, D.R. (2007). Multilateralism: fading or changing? In Foreign ministries: managing diplomatic networks and optimizing value (Eds: Rana, K., Kurbalija, J.). Malta, Msida, DiploFoundation, Belgrade, Serbia.

Burt, A. (2010). Effects on Diplomacy of Internet Technologies. Proceedings of a Westminster Hall Debate, December 2010. Available online: (accessed on May 2019).

Norris, P., (2002). “E-Voting as the Magic Ballot? The impact of Internet voting on turnout in European Parliamentary elections”, Paper for the Workshop on “E-voting and the European Parliamentary Elections”, Robert Schuman Center for Advanced Studies, Villa La Fonte, EUI. Available online: agic%20Ballot.pdf (accessed on October 2019).

Livingstone, S., & Third, A. (2017). Children and young people’s rights in the digital age: An emerging agenda. New Media & Society, 19(5), 657–670. doi:10.1177/1461444816686318.

Full Text: PDF

DOI: 10.28991/HIJ-2020-01-01-05


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2020 Gajendra Sharma