a) The UN 8. As early as May 2011, Frank La Rue, the former UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, provided a framework to analyze the human rights implications of States’ disruption of the internet. La Rue lamented “ways in which States are increasingly censoring information online,” including through “arbitrary blocking or filtering of content; criminalization of legitimate expression; [and] disconnecting users from Internet access [.]”6 9. In his report, La Rue characterized the internet as “one of the most powerful instruments of the 21st century for increasing transparency in the conduct of the powerful, access to information and for facilitating active citizen participation in building democratic societies,”7 and therefore “a key means by which individuals can exercise their right to freedom of opinion and expression.”8 Also, La Rue stated that the internet is an “enabler” of other rights such as the right to education and the right to take part in cultural life and to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications.9 10. La Rue added that any restriction to the right to freedom of expression, including restrictions on freedom of expression on the internet, must meet the strict criteria under international human rights law: (i) it must be provided by law, which is clear and accessible to everyone (principle of legality); (ii) it must pursue a legitimate aim (principle of legitimacy); and (iii) it must be proven as strictly necessary and the least restrictive means required to achieve the purported aim (principles of necessity and proportionality)10 (collectively, “the three-part test”). However, according to La Rue, “in many instances, States restrict, control, manipulate and censor content disseminated via the Internet without any legal basis, or on the basis of broad and ambiguous laws, without justifying the purpose of such actions; and/or in a manner that is clearly unnecessary and/or disproportionate to achieving the intended aim.”11 Consequently, “such actions are clearly incompatible with States’ obligations under international human rights law.”12 11. This analysis and concern about the States’ disruption of the internet have been increasingly reconfirmed by the UN and other multilateral organizations on many occasions. 12. One month after Frank La Rue’s report was published, the 2011 Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and the Internet issued by UN and regional experts in the field of freedom of expression reconfirmed, “[c]utting off access to the Internet, or parts of the 6 UN General Assembly, Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, UN Doc. A/HRC/17/27 (16 May 2011), https://undocs.org/en/A/HRC/17/27. 7 Id., para. 2. 8 Id., para. 20. 9 Id., para. 22. 10 Id., para. 24. 11 Id., para. 31. 12 Id. Page 3 of 13