This article was written by Suhaib Ahmad Rababah, Executive Director of the Intermediaries of Change Center for Sustainable Development and Sawt Ajloun Community Radio, as a reading of the United Nations report and a comparison with the Jordanian context.<\/strong><\/p>
\n
\n<\/div> The world today is witnessing an unprecedented transformation in the nature of the relationship between the state and its citizens as a result of the rapid advancement of digital surveillance technologies, artificial intelligence, and big data analytics. While governments emphasize that these tools have become essential for combating terrorism, cybercrime, and strengthening national security, international warnings are increasingly highlighting the risk of their transformation into instruments for restricting civil rights and freedoms and shrinking democratic spaces.<\/p>\n\n In this context, the United Nations Human Rights Council, during its sixty-second session, discussed the Special Rapporteur\u2019s report entitled \u201cExposing the Chilling Effects of Digital Surveillance on Freedom of Assembly and Association,\u201d which warns that digital surveillance is no longer merely an exceptional measure but has become, in many countries, a routine practice that directly affects individuals\u2019 freedom to organize, express themselves, and participate in civic life.<\/p>\n\n The report indicates that the most serious challenge facing the world today is not the existence of surveillance technologies themselves, but rather the normalization of their use, to the extent that they have become part of the routine practices of law enforcement agencies, often under broad justifications related to national security, counterterrorism, or the fight against cybercrime.<\/p>\n\n The report warns of several troubling trends, most notably the expansion of personal data collection without effective judicial oversight; the use of facial recognition technologies and artificial intelligence to monitor public spaces; the surveillance of activists, journalists, and human rights defenders; the creation of what is known as the \u201cchilling effect,\u201d whereby individuals refrain from exercising their rights out of fear of surveillance or prosecution; and the gradual erosion of the rights to freedom of assembly, association, and public participation.<\/p>\n\n The report does not oppose the use of technology to enhance security; rather, it emphasizes that any such use must be governed by the principles of necessity, proportionality, legality, judicial oversight, and accountability in accordance with international human rights law.<\/strong><\/p> Turning to the Jordanian context, Jordan has witnessed a noticeable expansion in legislation related to the digital sphere in recent years, most notably the Cybercrime Law of 2023. This legislation emerged amid a growing rise in cybercrime, hate speech, and online blackmail\u2014genuine challenges that require an effective legal response.<\/strong><\/p><\/p>\n\n However, the law also sparked broad debate among civil society organizations, human rights advocates, and media professionals, particularly regarding certain provisions that were considered broad in scope or open to multiple interpretations, potentially raising concerns about their impact on freedom of expression and civic engagement.<\/strong><\/p> Among the key issues discussed were the possibility of using some provisions to address political content or public criticism, as well as the impact of the legal environment on journalists, activists, and content creators.<\/strong><\/p><\/p>\n\n In contrast, the Jordanian government affirms that the law is aimed at combating online blackmail, hate speech, and digital fraud, as well as protecting societal security, and that it is not intended to restrict constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression.<\/strong><\/p>
\n Between these two positions, the real challenge remains how to achieve a balance between digital security and the protection of fundamental rights. One of the key messages of the UN report is that security should not come at the expense of freedoms. International experiences indicate that countries which have succeeded in combating cybercrime and terrorism have not relied solely on expanding surveillance powers; rather, they have built integrated systems based on: judicial independence, clear judicial warrants for surveillance, parliamentary and institutional oversight, protection of personal data, transparency in the use of surveillance technologies, and the availability of mechanisms for appeal and accountability.<\/strong><\/p>
\n
\n<\/div> For civil society, the impact of digital surveillance is not limited to privacy alone; it extends to the ability of organizations to operate freely. Fear of monitoring communications, meetings, or digital campaigns may lead some individuals to:<\/p>\n\n This is what the UN report calls the \u201cdeclining effect,\u201d meaning that fear alone is enough to reduce community participation even without direct measures against individuals. The most important question remains: How do we build a digital system that enhances security and protects society without becoming a source of restricting freedoms?\n
\n