A/HRC/44/24 10. ICT is useful for sharing information, thus creating a dynamic constituency and enabling people to be more informed and empowered. It can enable traditionally marginalized groups to access information more readily and to better enjoy their right of peaceful assembly. Such groups include civil rights and racial equality activists; environmental and land rights defenders; women human rights defenders; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex activists; people living in remote areas; and indigenous peoples. Live streaming and other forms of information-sharing online open up space for people who are not able to participate in physical demonstrations – for example, diaspora communities and people with disabilities. 14 11. Technology can also increase transparency and accountability for violations and abuses that may occur during protests. ICT enables the live streaming of assemblies through social media and the documentation of human rights violations through the use of smartphone cameras and other recording devices. 15 This is particularly important when the media is unwilling or unable to cover certain protests. 16 12. The use of body cameras by security officials can also help to ensure transparency and accountability for violence or human rights violations. Provided they are used properly, continuously and in a legal and legitimate manner, they can offer a useful record of an event. 17 United Nations special rapporteurs have observed that the appropriate use of body cameras by law enforcement personnel in the context of assemblies could assist the work of internal investigations or civilian oversight mechanisms. They considered that such cameras have the potential to promote accountability, where adequate safeguards are in place. 18 In some instances, the presence of cameras can also discourage law enforcement officials from resorting to violence. 19 The special procedure mandate holders warned that a delicate balancing of potential intrusions into privacy should be considered (see paras. 16–23 below). 13. Assemblies have taken place by way of physical gatherings for many years, but are now increasingly also happening online.20 People can use online spaces to participate in a virtually connected civil society, using those spaces to connect with others, exchange strategies and organize.21 The #MeToo movement is a recent example of this phenomenon. 22 The Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association has reiterated the obligation for States to ensure that online assemblies are facilitated in accordance with international human rights standards.23 He has also observed that the rights of freedom of peaceful assembly and of association are often seamlessly exercised online and offline.24 Moreover, there are also responsibilities for the social media companies that control online spaces, particularly with regard to encryption, content moderation, and algorithmic amplification, as will be discussed below. 14. Given the ways in which Internet-based technologies can serve as enablers for the exercise of human rights in the context of assemblies, it is crucial that States close the digital divide25 and secure Internet access for their population.26 The Human Rights Council27 and 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 4 Contributions of the Association for Progressive Communications and WITNESS. Contributions of Defensoría del Pueblo de la Nación Argentina, the National Human Rights Commission of Mexico, ODIHR, WITNESS and the Human Rights House Foundation. Contribution of the Digital Rights Foundation. Contributions of Armenia, North Macedonia and Romania. A/HRC/31/66, para. 92. Contribution of the Association for Progressive Communications. Contributions of Ecuador, the Special Rapporteur for freedom of expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, and Amnesty International. See also www.vukacoalition.org. A/HRC/41/41, para. 23. Contribution of the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association. A/HRC/29/25/Add.1, para. 34. A/HRC/41/41, para. 28. The term “digital divide” refers to the gap between individuals, households, businesses and geographic areas at different socioeconomic levels with regard to their opportunities to access ICTs and to their use of the Internet for a wide variety of activities (A/HRC/35/9, para. 3). A/HRC/27/33, para. 22. Human Rights Council resolution 38/7.