A/HRC/32/38 Rapporteur’s website.4 The Special Rapporteur also benefited greatly from consultations. He held a meeting on 25 and 26 January 2016 with 25 members of civil society at the University of California, Irvine School of Law, and a separate meeting with 20 individuals from the private sector and civil society on 29 February 2016 at the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva. Meeting summaries are also be found on the Special Rapporteur’s website. II. Freedom of expression, States and the private sector in the digital age 5. This mapping report rests on a basic question: to what extent should the information and communications technology sector be responsible for the promotion and protection of freedom of opinion and expression? Addressing this question requires beginning with a summary of the international human rights law according to which States are obligated to promote and protect freedom of expression and principles addressing private-sector human rights responsibilities. A. International legal framework 6. Article 19 of both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights protects everyone’s right to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers and through any media. It has become customary to emphasize that individuals enjoy the same rights online as they do offline. The previous mandate holder highlighted the increasing number and forms of restrictions on the right to information online (see A/HRC/17/27) and demonstrated the impact on freedom of expression of expanded digital surveillance (see A/HRC/23/40). In 2015, the Special Rapporteur emphasized the important role played by encryption and anonymity in protecting and advancing the freedom of expression (see A/HRC/29/32). In joint declarations, the Special Rapporteur and regional counterparts have emphasized issues relating to intermediary liability, access, content restrictions and other key topics on freedom of expression online. 7. Article 19 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights allows for restrictions on the freedom of expression (but not on the freedom of opinion under article 19 (1)). According to article 19 (3), any restriction, to be legitimate, must be provided by law and necessary for the respect of the rights or reputations of others or the protection of national security or of public order, or of public health or morals. Any restriction must be precise enough and publicly accessible in order to limit the authorities’ discretion and provide individuals with adequate guidance (see the Human Rights Committee’s general comment No. 34 (2011) on article 19: freedoms of opinion and expression). To be necessary, a restriction must be more than merely useful, reasonable or desirable.5 It is also well established that necessity requires an assessment of proportionality (see A/HRC/29/32). Proportionality requires demonstrating that restrictive measures are the least intrusive instrument among those which might achieve their protective function and proportionate to the interest to be protected (see general comment No. 34). When 4 5 4 Law; Internet Society; Korean Progressive Network Jinbonet; Privacy International; Ranking Digital Rights; and New America. Available from www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/FreedomOpinion/Pages/Annual.aspx. European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 6538/74, The Sunday Times v. The United Kingdom (26 April 1979), para. 59.