A/HRC/41/41 including sharing photos and videos of police abuse against protesters, disseminating messages calling for peaceful demonstrations, and political campaigning. The rules also impose severe penalties, and civil society organizations face the risk of being shut down for disseminating prohibited content, which is disproportionate and incompatible with the right to freedom of association. In addition, these restrictions are imposed through a government decree, adding to legality concerns.46 Demonstrations laws 37. In the Russian Federation, for instance, the “Yarovaya Law” introduced overly broad amendments to the Criminal Code that prohibited “inducing, recruiting or otherwise involving” others in the organization of “mass unrest”. 47 Publishing statements on the Internet is considered an aggravating factor. Similarly, in Kazakhstan, the Criminal Code forbids providing “assistance” to “illegal” assemblies, including by “means of communication”. 48 The broad language of these provisions unduly limits the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly, association and expression, by potentially making it a crime to promote, discuss, seek or link to information regarding a protest event. 2. Legitimate aim 38. Restrictions on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association must pursue a legitimate aim. The Covenant recognizes only the following aims as legitimate: “national security or public safety, public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others”. States cannot invoke permissible justifications to conceal illegitimate aims. Criminalization of online activities 39. Criminalizing the online activities of individuals and organizations constitutes a growing trend in many countries in the world. 49 Individuals are often charged with illdefined crimes found in antiterrorism, cybercrime and anti-protest laws. Viet Nam, for example, arrested and charged a human rights defender for comments on the Internet allegedly criticizing the Government.50 The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela convicted, on crimes of incitement to violence, a political opposition leader calling for antigovernment protests on social media.51 The United Arab Emirates arrested and prosecuted human rights defenders on charges of “circulating false and misleading information on the Internet with a view to spreading hatred and sectarianism”52 and with using social media to “endanger State security and insult the rulers” under the Cybercrime Law.53 Egypt arrested and prosecuted activists for “joining an organization founded in violation of the Constitution” and to “undermine State institutions”, in retaliation for comments made on social media.54 In Saudi Arabia, a founding member of the Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association was reportedly sentenced to eight years in prison and an eight-year travel ban for “violating article 6 of the Anti-Cybercrime Law” by “inciting public opinion against the rulers of this country and signing statements that were published online that call on people to demonstrate”, and “insisting to not abide by the judicial decision to abolish” the Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association. 55 Saudi women human rights defenders opposing driving bans have been prosecuted in terrorism-related cases, including for “incitement to 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 10 Inter‐American Commission on Human Rights, “Second report on the situation of human rights defenders in the Americas” (OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc. 66), para. 165. See RUS 7/2016. A/HRC/29/25/Add.2, para. 57. A/71/373, paras. 29–35. See VNM 1/2017. See Working Group on Arbitrary Detention opinion No. 26/2014. See ARE 1/2018. See ARE 5/2013. See EGY 4/2017. See SAU 4/2016.