the Right to democratic governance
in the
Digital
Realm
In the digital age, the architecture of governance has evolved beyond the traditional confines of nation-states and governmental bodies. At the forefront of this transformation are private entities, specifically technology companies, whose operations and decisions exert widespread implications that mirror those of conventional governance structures. Indeed, in terms of international reach, power, and wealth, the largest tech companies rival—even surpass—the governments of many nation-states. These entities perform "governance functions" through actions or policies that significantly impact the public's rights, freedoms, privacy, and access.
This profound shift requires a universal application of digital governance that transcends the traditional dichotomy between private entities and state governments, and encompasses all forms of power that shape our digital lives.
As such, we affirm the necessity of establishing principles of digital governance on the basis of
the will of the people.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau's famous treatise, "On the Social Contract," argues that government should be an expression of the will of the people. These principles aim to that ensure that all entities wielding governance functions, whether they are technological giants or traditional governmental institutions, serve to uphold the common good, enhancing democracy, human dignity, and the rights of individuals globally.
The End of the Nation State? Big Tech is More Valuable than Entire Countries
1 / 4
Apple's Market Cap Compared to GDPs, Visual Capitalist
2 / 4
Microsoft's Market Cap Compared to GDPs, Visual Capitalist
3 / 4
Amazon's Market Cap Compared to GDPs, Visual Capitalist
4 / 4
Facebook/Meta's Market Cap Compared to GDPs, Visual Capitalist
Everyone has a right to privacy in the digital realm, including protection from unauthorized surveillance, data collection, and breaches by governmental and/or private entities.
Everyone has a right to know what data is being collected, where it is being stored, and what it is being used for.
Everyone has the right to be protected from abuses facilitated by technology, including misinformation, manipulation, financial exploitation, and other harms.
Digital platforms and technologies must be designed and operated in a manner that prioritizes user privacy and data security, with clear, consent-based data practices.
The digital space shall remain open and accessible, fostering the right to free expression.
The free flow of information entails protection against censorship and undue restrictions by both state and non-state actors, ensuring that the digital arena serves as a platform for diverse voices and ideas.
Notes
There have been multiple instances of government entities pressuring private companies to remove content for political reasons. This behavior must be discouraged and exposed for transparent governance to occur.
Everyone has the right to access and participate in the digital world.
Everyone has the right to be safeguarded safeguarded against unjust or malicious restrictions on technology access, whether imposed by their own government, foreign governments, or non-state entities.
Digital authorities must therefore ensure equitable access to technology, combat digital divides, and promote inclusivity, enabling full participation in the digital economy, culture, and politics.
"
Should digital/e-democracy replace traditional physical voting methods?
Everyone has the right to
transparency
Being able to coherently understand coherently the workings of a system.
from entities that own, manage, or operate digital platforms and technologies.
This entails the right to be informed about how personal data is used, how content moderation decisions are made, and how algorithms amplify the information and services one receives.
Everyone has the right to seek redress and corrective measures when digital practices infringe on personal rights and freedoms.
Private companies have a duty to strive towards technological progress while promoting the public good.
This entails a responsibility to anticipate, mitigate, and take responsibility for potentially harmful consequences.
Notes
Should governments be able to limit their citizens’ access to data, hardware, or software in the name of digital sovereignty? Regardless of intent, limitations on Internet access result in inevitable tradeoffs with the free spread of information and productivity of individuals.
There has been a push by different nation-states to have control over the data that interacts with its residents. This type of sovereignty needs to be examined carefully to prevent abuse.
In 2020, Google's algorithms were found to give voters a skewed look at ballot measures by producing biased excerpts from California's official election guide. Regardless of malicious intent, the case demonstrates how such distortions can threaten the integrity of the electoral process, emphasizing the need for algorithmic transparency.
