A/HRC/28/39 A. General remarks on the right to privacy in the digital age 32. Many delegations highlighted the quality of the report submitted by the High Commissioner on the right to privacy in the digital age and the fact that it was an important milestone in the context of the ongoing discussion. Many delegations also noted their appreciation for the work of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and others in ensuring that the right to privacy was safeguarded in law and in practice. 33. Many delegations welcomed the panel discussion, as the topic was timely and the discussion necessary, bearing in mind that technological advances ran ahead of an understanding of their human rights implications. The importance of discussions held on the issue by the Human Rights Council, as well as in other forums, such as the Internet Governance Forum, was also noted. 34. One delegation noted that there were close to 3 billion Internet users around the world and that a free and secure Internet had become a priority for people everywhere. As foreseen in the post-2015 sustainable development goals and the Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries for the Decade 2011–2020 (A/CONF.219/3/Rev.1), everyone should have access to the Internet by 2020. 35. Most interventions indicated, as already highlighted in the report of the United Nations High Commissioner, that innovations in technology had had a positive impact on freedom of expression, had facilitated global debate and had fostered democratic participation. It was noted that digital communications could be tools for facilitating the enjoyment of human rights, had contributed to the advancement of human civilization, and had brought new opportunities for communication, knowledge and business. Privacy was integral to a free, fair and open society in which views could be freely expressed without any fear of repression or detention. 36. Most delegations noted, however, that the same technological platforms had also enhanced the capacities of State and non-State actors to conduct surveillance, interception and mass data collection. Some delegations stated that those platforms were not only vulnerable to mass surveillance, but actually facilitated it. One NGO noted that when privacy online was threatened, trust in the Internet disappeared, depriving everyone, including journalists, bloggers and human rights defenders, of the liberty to communicate securely, anonymously and in confidence, with a chilling effect on freedom of expression. Another NGO emphasized that for everyone, especially those living under repressive regimes, the integrity of communications was critical to preserving individual liberty and security of the person, as well as political rights. 37. The exponential growth of State power in some countries due to their information technology infrastructure was noted. Some delegations focused on the fact that much of the world’s electronic communications passed through a limited number of countries. In turn, that provided an opportunity for intercepting private communications. Some countries had developed technologies that allowed access to much of the world’s global Internet traffic, call records, individuals’ electronic address books and huge volumes of other digital communications content. Reports of certain Governments monitoring communications at global events were also referred to. A number of speakers recalled that the sovereignty of States should always be respected with regard to surveillance, interception and the collection of personal data. 38. Other delegations noted that there was a growing trend by some Governments to use cybertechnologies to control their own citizens, in violation of their right to freedom of expression and the right of access to information. It was noted that political activists and members of religious minorities were targeted, detained and sometimes killed. An NGO 10