Human rights must be protected: UK Statement at the UN Third Committee

Chair, the UK's EOP at the conclusion of negotiations explained our basis for joining consensus on this Convention. Building on this, I will focus today on addressing views and interpretations expressed by stakeholders and some delegations.

Stakeholders are right to highlight the potential risks that this Convention could pose to human rights given its broad scope of international cooperation for the sharing of e-evidence and its intrusive procedural powers.

These risks led the UK, and many others, to insist on effective human rights safeguards in the final text. If applied properly and in good faith, these safeguards mean that human rights will be protected as the Convention is implemented. This is a legal obligation applicable to all State Parties.

Article 24, relating to the Convention's procedural powers, is an example. Paragraph 1 of this Article says a Party's domestic law shall provide for conditions and safeguards, which shall provide for the protection of human rights, in accordance with international human rights law.

While those conditions and safeguards will be provided for in a Party's domestic law, the obligation to establish them is not optional. Nor is the obligation subservient to domestic law.

As is made clear by 24(4), these human rights obligations apply equally at the domestic level and when engaging in international cooperation.

It is concerning that a few Member States have already tried to deny or dodge them.

Chair, good faith adherence to safeguards is essential for building trust and unlocking the greater level of international cooperation most Member States aspire to. The UK will play close attention to the implementation of, and adherence to, the safeguards. The stakeholder community must also play an important role here.

The UK stands ready to cooperate with States who respect the letter and the spirit of the Convention, and support their efforts through capacity building.

To be clear - the UK will not cooperate with any country which does not comply with the safeguards required by this Convention.

Ultimately, while the commitments in the Convention are critical, it is how State Parties implement them in the real world which will determine whether this Convention makes a practical difference to efforts towards our common aim to prevent and combat cybercrime.

Finally, the UK appreciates Vietnam's offer to host a signing ceremony - but expresses our strong concern at the unprecedented procedure by which this amendment has been introduced after the Ad Hoc Committee had concluded its work.

We accept this amendment on the basis that there are no PBIs and, noting the commitment Vietnam has expressed to an open dialogue with stakeholders, encourage Vietnam to maintain the inclusive spirit of the Ad Hoc Committee by enabling participation of stakeholders at the signing ceremony.

Public link

Please use the above public link if you want to share this noodl on another website.