Main Topic 1 –  Human Rights in the Digital Era: Europe’s Role in Safeguarding Human Rights Online 

Experts debate Europe’s role in protecting human rights online at Vilnius conference

At a conference in Vilnius, a panel discussion titled “Human Rights in the Digital Era, Europe’s Role in Safeguarding Human Rights Online” brought together experts to discuss the intersection of digital transformation, internet governance, and human rights. Lucien Castex opened the session by acknowledging the significant digital transformation society has undergone and the challenges it poses to human rights, such as freedom of expression and privacy. He mentioned the ongoing UNGDC negotiations and the WSIS anniversary, both of which have implications for internet governance and human rights, and the UN 2030 Agenda, which underscores the challenges in creating a desirable digital future.

The panel comprised Vessela Karloukovska from the European Commission, Dennis Redeker from the Digital Constitutionalism Network, Ana Cristina Amoroso das Neves from the Portuguese government, and Paolo Grassia from ETNO, representing telecom companies.

Karloukovska discussed the EU’s role as a leader in integrating human rights into digital policies, citing the Charter of Fundamental Rights as a legal basis for upholding citizens’ rights. She mentioned the EU Declaration of Digital Rights and Principles and the Declaration on the Future of the Internet, which articulate the EU’s vision for an open internet and provide actionable commitments for policy formulation.

Redeker addressed the multitude of documents related to digital rights and the challenges of policy implementation. He emphasized the importance of legal documents, like Brazil’s Marco Civil da Internet, and the role of civil society in influencing discourse and shaping binding documents.

Neves spoke about the Portuguese Charter of Human Rights and its influence on the European Declaration, highlighting the need for a human rights framework that extends into the digital realm.

Grassia discussed the special duty of telecoms to protect users and their role in society, citing examples of social responsibility actions by telecoms during the Ukraine war. He emphasized the importance of legal frameworks, such as GDPR, in guiding company operations and the need for clarity in grey areas of the law.

Audience questions touched on the application of human rights standards online versus offline, the use of anonymised data for research and human development, and the need for greater awareness of the European Declaration on Digital Rights and Principles. The panellists reiterated the foundational values of the EU, the importance of cohesive global digital governance approaches, and the need for continuous reaffirmation of human rights commitments within the EU.

The session concluded with an acknowledgment of the IGF’s role in facilitating multi-stakeholder discussions on internet governance and human rights. The panellists expressed gratitude to the participants and organizers, highlighting the significance of such discussions in shaping the future of digital rights and governance. The moderator encouraged attendees to take a break before the next session, emphasizing the importance of attendee engagement and well-being during the event.

Lucien Castex:
Can you hear me? Yes, perfect. Thank you. Hello, everyone. I’m quite happy to be there in Vilnius. Lucien Castex, I will invite in a minute all the speakers to come on the stage and just do a quick presentation of the session and try to, you know, bring the debate to the room here in Vilnius and online. As you know, there are some lively debates in store on internet governance for this year, 2024 and the next. We heard some about it yesterday in the plenary, both with the UNGDC, which is being negotiated as we speak, but also we approach the 20th anniversary of the WESES. One of the interesting points is that all of these initiatives target or mention human rights in different perspectives. We also are at the target date of the UNITED NATION 2030 agenda, reminding us of the challenges that remain in building a desirable digital future. This session’s title is Human Rights in the Digital Era, Europe’s Role in Safeguarding Human Rights Online. As you know, in the last 20 years, the digital transformation of society has been extensive, as increasingly ubiquitous. Building people-centered, inclusive and development-oriented information society is still today, in 2024, a challenge, even in Europe, to be met. The common vision of the WSIS developed in 2003 and 2005, as we discussed yesterday during the consultation. on the WSIS Plus 20 review, this vision where everyone can create, access, utilize, and share information and knowledge, take today a renewed relevance and is quite important to have in mind. From freedom of expression being challenged to the blurriness of constant data collection and processing implicating privacy issues, exacerbated by the emergence of new and emerging technologies, which fuel a feeling of being permanently watched, is being quite today important to tackle. Harnessing the potential of ICTs has created a number of opportunities, but also in spite of significant progress, a number of challenges remain to be met, connectivity, as we mentioned yesterday, with above two billion people remaining to be online, but also on vulnerability and an increasing number of people and new form of vulnerability arising and being amplified. In that session, we aim to address the question on how is Europe safeguarding human rights in the digital era? I invite the panelists to join me on the stage. Thank you. Hello, colleagues. So, we have three distinguished panellists, Steve, let me check the order to be sure. Yeah, sorry. So, we have a change of panellists. Steve Sands is being replaced by, let me check, Vessela Karloukovska, which is Policy Officer on Internet Governance Team at the DigiConnect. We have on the stage also Ana Neves, you are Head of Internet Governance Office, Foundation for Science and Technology, Vice Chair of the UNCSTD and Chair of the DNS.pt Advisory Board. We have Dennis Redeker on stage as well. Dennis, you are Funding Member of the Interdisciplinary Digital Constitutionalism Network and Member of the Steering Committee of the Internet Rights and Principles Coalition. And we have Paolo Grassia, you are Senior Director of Public Policy at ETNO. So first, I’ll turn to Anna and ask you that prior to the adoption of the European Declaration, the Portuguese government approved the Portuguese Charter of Human Rights in April 2021 as a legislative text to grant the protection and the population online. In your opinion, what is the relationship between the Portuguese Charter and the European Declaration.

Ana Cristina Amoroso das Neves:
Hello, good morning everyone. So, concerning the Portuguese Charter, well, it was an initiative that was top-down and it started in 2020 and it was a way to demonstrate the importance to have something on human rights. So, during the Portuguese Presidency of the Council of the European Union, we continued that effort, but at the European level and following the declarations that were already signed in Estonia and in Berlin, so it was the moment during the Portuguese Presidency of the Council of the European Union during the first semester of 2021, to put that discussion at the European level. And then it was signed the Lisbon Declaration on Digital Democracy with a purpose and that one was, I think, that influenced the proposal of the European Commission on the text that was proposed in January 2022 and then the adoption of the European Declaration in December already in the Czech Presidency of the Council of the European Union. So, it was like a start, like let’s go for it, but of course it couldn’t be a national charter. So, I think it was a work in progress that led us to the Lisbon Declaration on Digital Democracy with a purpose that was then adopted. by June 2021. Thank you.

Lucien Castex:
Thank you, Ana. I’ll turn to Denis. Denis, there are other charter documents out there. It is sometimes quite difficult to always see the link between all these documents and the actual policy implementation. Could you maybe tell us a little more about other examples or impact and your thoughts about it?

Dennis Redeker:
Absolutely. Thank you for that question. So there are so many documents like that. And we found that the Digital Constitutionalism Network with colleagues in 2019 to study these documents, we’ve by now counted more than 300 of those documents. And we like to compare them. And well, these documents are being written sometimes by states, sometimes by supranational entities. They’re written by civil society companies, the all kinds of actors in this business, sometimes multi-stakeholder processes. Also the question is really, when you talk about implementation, how do you actually make this into policy is what kind of document is it? It’s much easier. It’s easiest if it’s a legal document, such as the well-known Marcos Vila Internet in Brazil. That is a clear path toward policy implementation. If you have sometimes a document that is being written by a state entity, but non-binding, for example, the 2015 Declaration of Internet Rights in Italy, passed by the Italian Parliament, but it has no legal effect. It can still be cited by Italian, and has been cited by Italian judges in their decisions. So there are all kinds of processes to implement this. If you have company policies and company principle documents, then it really is up to the companies to have the right measures in place in order to have the rights and principles enshrined into the AI development and rollout, for example. And then lastly, this brings me to civil society. There’s the least binding way of actually having an impact potentially, but civil society very often has an impact on discourse. It has this discursive power. So very often we find those principles and those ideas later on in binding documents because civil society works to spread that word. So I’ve studied the feminist principles of the Internet, a document created by feminist and digital rights activists from the Global South, first published in 2014, and these activists went back and translated these documents into the local context where they’re from in order to have a maximum impact from the bottom up. So it’s a different process from the European process that you just described. But all these things happen simultaneously, and they happen also together to some extent, especially with regard to influence of ideas. And now changing the hat that I have on as the co-chair of the steering committee of the Internet Rights and Principles Coalition, dynamic coalition of multi-stakeholder actors at the Internet Governance Forum, we also created an old document. So this is the charter, it’s the German version of it. There are 13 language translations now from the charter. It’s more than 10 years old, but still, if you want to read it, you can go online on our website and you can find it in your language. It is actually still very much up to date, and so I’m happy to talk about that also at some point.

Lucien Castex:
Thank you. Thank you, Denise. Prepare all the public online and here in the room in Vilnius, prepare your questions. I’ll give the floor. You mentioned civil society and the need of multi-stakeholderism to actually be able to implement such a document efficiently. I’ll turn to Paolo from ETNO. The companies are key to putting into practice actual European policy initiative. Most of the companies have developed their own principle to give their action and decisions. Where do the companies get their principle from, apart from the law, obviously, when having to make difficult decisions?

Paolo Grassia:
Thank you. Thanks a lot. So I would like to invite the panel to come up and present their slides. Okay. I think it works now. Thank you. Thanks a lot. And thanks for having me on the panel. As I know, we do represent European telecom network operators. We are longstanding partners with EuroDIG. We have been working with them for a long time. And I would like to ask you, as a representative of telcos, of course, I cannot speak on behalf of the whole private sector, all the companies, but I would say to your question, telcos have a special duty towards their user, customer, to protect them. And also they have a very delicate role in society. So I say that trust and also respect of fundamental rights is very important. And I would like to ask you, as a representative of telcos, what do you think about this trust? Of course, they can’t really credibly operate towards the users and the broader society. And we have seen also in times of crisis that European telcos have acted on their social responsibility. If we go back to the start of the Ukraine war in February 2022, a lot of telecommunications companies were forced to provide free Wi-Fi to Ukrainian residents in the EU and also to incoming refugees. Free SMS, free calls, free SIMs, Wi-Fi hotspots and free roaming. That resulted in MOU with the European Commission and some companies also facilitated by our associations that formalize these commitments. So this is how the telcos do operate based on their social responsibility. And I would say in normal times, of course, they all have their own principles, as you say, guidance. I was very pleased, for example, at the eve, the beginning of the discussions about the AI Act and about the ethical framework for artificial intelligence in Europe that some companies were not able to do that. So I would like to ask you, as a representative of telcos, already had some internal charters that guided their application of AI in their internal operations, like the human in control, data minimization, all these principles were already embedded in some companies. But an important concept to bear in mind is that law that you mentioned remains the cornerstones that define the perimeter within which companies need and want to operate to avoid overreach. We have a number of examples, just the most important net neutrality, for example, has been a law and a cornerstone of EU law and kind of telco practices for almost a decade. It’s something that we remain committed to, and even we also would like to have further guidance from the European Commission, European authorities on how net neutrality applies to emerging use cases on 5G, network slicing, network as a service to avoid actually being in conflict of law. Online liability also connected to net neutrality and has to do a lot with harmful and illegal content. We do really stick to what the law tells us so that we do avoid overly taking down the content and impinge on the freedom of our users and internet user as a whole. Privacy and confidentiality, where on top of the GDPR there are special privacy rules for telecommunication, security disability. There are then a number of special laws for telcos that do constitute a solid legal framework for our sector. And we want to, of course, remain within the boundary of law. So that’s the primary source of reference in Europe for our operations. Of course, it’s not all. clear-cut and stable. So there are some gray zones where sometimes the legal framework is not clear and especially in exceptional times there can be these kind of situations. For example, going back to the Ukraine war, the early implementation of sanctions against Russia where ISPs were ordered to block and content dissemination and broadcast even content backed by Kremlin of course had very legitimate grounds but also our members and talcos in general really wanted to have legal clarity from the authorities because the sanctions as they were put out were quite vague and they could have led to some overreach in taking down too many websites and also in a way impinging on freedom online. So that’s something when there are like some gray zones, gray areas, based on our experience we do seek for some clarity and have a constructive dialogue with regulators and decision makers to have even really like clarity and to avoid actually the pitfalls of conflicts of law.

Lucien Castex:
Thank you. You mentioned a number of initiatives including the GDPR and EU legislation. I’ll turn to our colleague online, to Vessela Karloukovska. You are from the European Commission and we would like to have your thoughts on basically when the Commission is participating to make a new regulation, new piece of law, how do you take into consideration existing declaratory documents such as the declaration for the future of the internet for instance?

Vessela Karloukovska:
Good morning everybody. My name is Vessela Karloukovska and I’m a policy officer at DG Connect, the European Commission’s directorate dealing with among lots of other things communication networks and information. technology with internet governance. So besides answering the moderator’s question, I’m also going to touch on some external aspects because human rights goes far beyond and spills far beyond our legislation. It has very strong external international global dimension. So we all agreed, I think that this was widely acknowledged by the other interlocutors that the EU is indeed a forerunner in integrating digital, in integrating human rights into its digital policies, starting with the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which is the cornerstone. It’s binding on the EU institutions and on the national governments of the member states when they have to implement EU law. And it’s a guarantee to the citizens that all legislative and policy measures uphold their fundamental rights and freedoms. The principle extends seamlessly into the digital realm. For many parts of the world outside of the EU, this is not entirely obvious. But besides the Charter, I would like to mention two other significant declarations which are shaping the EU’s regulatory landscape. The first one is the EU Declaration of Digital Rights and Principles, often connected to the European Digital Decade. And the second one, perhaps lesser known because it has a softer nature. It’s called Declaration on the Future of the Internet. So both build upon the foundation that the Charter lays. But the European Union has articulated its vision of the open internet through the Declaration of the Future for the Internet, and the EU Declaration of Digital Rights and Principles. So let me underline that these documents are not just purely aspirational and declaratory, they’re very concrete. They contain actionable commitments that guide us and the member states in formulating policies that are basically protect and respond to the already what is becoming a very complicated mesh of digital rights and freedoms, particularly with the rapid advancement of technology. The Declaration on the Future of the Internet, it’s an international document, if I can call it that way, because it has summoned the signature by not only member states, which obviously they are signatories to the declaration, but way beyond. It already has over 70 signatories worldwide. And its aim is to secure a global internet that remains a source, a resource for empowerment of the users. It’s all about creating an internet environment that supports human rights. It revolves around human rights, about the rule of democracy, rule of law. And it is particularly critical because it explicitly connects our external actions with our internal values. So it ensures a very cohesive approach to global digital governance. In that relation, it is also a recognition of how important the open Internet is today, with the permission of digital technologies in all spheres of life and human activity, underscoring the human-centered digital transition as the main driver of development. So I’ll stop here and then we can expand further.

Lucien Castex:
Thank you. Thank you a lot for the overview. I like your expression, a complicated mesh of digital rights indeed. I’ll turn to the room and to Vilnius and online. Do we have anyone online with questions?

Audience:
Currently, not really. But we did have a comment that I think goes in line with the previous speaker. I can read briefly. The people-centered digital transformation has always been the main objective. However, it seems elusive for many jurisdictions where technology takes the lead without due regard to fundamental digital human rights. How is the European Union achieving this objective and what lessons can other jurisdictions learn from the EU’s successes in protecting digital human rights and ensuring that technological advancement does not happen at the expense of digital human rights? So I think it’s a general question, so maybe someone else can address it. And this comment is from Lufuno T. Cicalange. We also heard from her yesterday.

Lucien Castex:
Thank you. Maybe I’ll take one more from the room, a colleague in the center. So be ready to catch it. Perfect.

Audience:
Thank you. My name is Jacques Biglinger, Swiss IGF, but at the same time I’m teaching at Dutch University. And there my Chinese students have difficulties understanding why Europe is so obsessed with human rights. So my question maybe to everybody, how would you just explain to a, let’s say, 25-year-old Chinese student coming to Europe, seeing Europe for a year, and then still asking why do we need human rights online?

Lucien Castex:
Thank you, Jacques. I’ll maybe give our colleagues a chance to give, so Dennis, maybe, do you want to give a few? I’m sure.

Dennis Redeker:
Does it work? Yeah. Does it work? Yeah. Well, that’s a tough one. I think both questions are very good. This is a very tough question. So this is the question of why do we need human rights anywhere, whether that’s online or offline, right? This is part of our values. I mean, if we look at who we are as Europeans, I think we are a community of people who share certain values, and this is what we do. It’s very difficult, and this is going opposite to the colleague of DG Connect and others who represent European human rights, European values to other partners. We do share human rights globally. Now, there is certainly debate with China, no question about that, but we do share them. There’s a common commitment. This is why we talk about and talk on the basis of human rights when we talk about all these discussions. So we don’t have to agree on this, that human rights should be included in the GDC. We’re striving for how we include it. it, certainly, and how we have strong safeguards. But I think there shouldn’t be a discussion on whether we want human rights or not. But I do want to react also to the other question or comment. Because I think what Europe needs to do in order to not just portray itself as a place where human rights online are being protected, but really following up is to be very, very strong on actually keeping the commitments. And we’ve seen recently a member state, France, has banned TikTok. It’s a big discussion among civil society groups. Now, European member states are banning social media platforms if they just don’t like the protest. How is that different from what we do? So it’s really, really, I think, crucial for the European Union not just to have commitments, but to really look at the declaration, at the different declarations, when doing all these acts. There may be safety and public safety reasons to do that. But it’s going to be very, very difficult to justify pointing the finger at anyone else who claims the same reasons. So I think Europe doesn’t only have to do the talk, but also has to do the work in many regards with implementing human rights online.

Lucien Castex:
Thank you, Dennis. Maybe Anna, do you want to add a few words?

Ana Cristina Amoroso das Neves:
Very short. So UN has a pillar. It is the Charter of Human Rights. So in all the countries that are part of the UN, they sign this charter. Two, for China, the state is the father of the people. And so they consider that they have to act on behalf of the people. So they don’t have the freedom of expression exactly because the state knows what they have to know. That’s it. Third point is that the human rights that we are discussing nowadays, it’s that our base, that human rights. in the physical world should be the same in the digital world. Thank you.

Lucien Castex:
Thank you, Anna. Maybe online, Vesela, do you want to reflect on the questions?

Vessela Karloukovska:
Yes, the simplest questions are the hardest, but actually I think that it just boils down to the foundational values of the EU, which is just so central to the European project. They’re enshrined in the foundational treaties of the European Union, so the commitment of the EU and its member states is embedded in the legal basis, and then it has infiltrated all our policies. It’s actually a prerequisite for any country that wishes to join the Union, and it probably also has to do with the historical context of the continent, the continent, both, I mean, if we think of the world wars and the totalitarian regimes, the division of the continent during the Cold War, where human rights were being violated until modern age on a massive scale. So all these experiences actually teach lessons about the need for a sound system, a healthy system, that protects individual rights and prevents future violations, not to say atrocities, God forbid.

Lucien Castex:
Thank you. Paolo, do you want to give us your thoughts?

Paolo Grassia:
Yes, I would not add much to the explanation of what human rights are, and on top of just saying that’s what allows a person to to fully express their own self and their full role within the society. So that’s why human rights are so important. But I just wanted also to kind of link back to what we were saying about the, also kind of the shifting concept around human rights. We have been used, and also within this discussion, to depict a bit European values versus the rest of the world. That’s true that in a way, the EU has helped shape how we conceive human rights online, not only in jurisdictions that we sometimes believe are kind of on a learning curve, but even, and that’s quite exceptional, the EU could shape the way the United States, for example, understand human rights online, privacy, for example, confidentiality, GDPR, and the whole discussion about the European safe harbor, EU-US safe harbor, privacy shield, and then privacy framework. So this iterative process of, in a way, kind of soft policy and moral suasion. And also, from the private companies, for example, the companies do understand that also the understanding of human rights can differ across jurisdictions, depending on the cultural backdrop, societal backdrop, but still, they need to have high-level commitments to some basic respect of human rights. So, for example, a lot of companies, not only telcos, but also online platforms, are part of the GNI, the Global Network Initiatives, that stands behind the respect of plurality, privacy online, and objecting quite vocally undue network shutdowns. That’s what you were explaining, indeed, across the world. But what we have been seeing over recent years is that also the… what we perceive that rock-solid understanding and conception around human rights in the EU is not that rock-solid. So, for example, media freedom has been slowly eroded in some countries within the EU. Also, in a way, the societal role of online intermediaries platform, but also ISPs is constantly put into question when there are some crises or, in a way, some exceptional circumstances. So, in a way, the kind of reaffirmation of human rights, even within the EU, is not something that we have to give for granted just because we have a treaty, we have primary and secondary law, is, again, an iterative process where we constantly need to reaffirm our commitment to that.

Lucien Castex:
Thank you, thank you. I’ll take a second round of question. I see on the right, two, actually, people on the right. Get ready to catch the mic.

Audience:
Thank you for your presentations and interventions, and I particularly like the statement that human rights online shouldn’t be less than human rights offline. And, of course, we have the human right of secrecy of correspondence, and nobody would search all physical letters for problematic content, but we have, again, proposals of chat control in front of the EU, and it seems that we don’t apply the same standards to online and offline human rights. So, what is your position on that? Should we have the same standards on human rights, or does online justify to? have lower standards because the risks are higher. Thank you.

Lucien Castex:
Thank you. I see the lady on, yeah.

Audience:
Hi, I just want to thank you for your presentations and your points. My name is Laila, I’m with the YouthDIG group and I just wanted to ask, I think it’s more specifically about for the telecoms representatives, if there has been a discussion about the potential of using data in an anonymized way, of course, to protect users’ privacy, but to support research efforts to improve human rights and human development improvement. I just ask because I’ve read about some projects that talk about the potential of using this data to better coordinate efforts during climate disasters or things like that. So I just wanted to know if this is a point in the discussion, if it’s even on the table or not at all. So just to know your views on that. Thank you.

Lucien Castex:
Thank you. Thank you. And Martin, in the back.

Audience:
Thank you. Martin Botterman. A question I fully embrace and I’m very happy with the European Declaration on Digital Rights and Principles. The thing is that so few people know it and there are so many declarations. So wouldn’t it be better to put a lot of emphasis on this particular declaration and get it more known? Because I think even in governments, in foreign ministries, I’ve heard a very low level of awareness and here in the room I think it’s the same. Because one of the principles is that it’s offline, online is just offline. I think it’s a very worthy declaration to get more attention, so anything that could be done about that.

Lucien Castex:
Thank you. Three questions, so we have, well, five minutes, so we need to be very quick about it, but I’ll give the floor first to Vessela Online. What are your reflections on the questions?

Vessela Karloukovska:
Yes, I would like to answer the gentleman who asked the last question. EU decision-making is extremely complex and numerous groups, governmental institutional parties are involved in it, not to mention also then the consultations with stakeholders. But what we are, especially in the field of internet governance, where this declaration is just as relevant, is that we are now merging several conversations. So the conversation of the foreign ministries with the conversations of the communication and tech ministries, there is already a digital diplomacy network, which is managed by the European External Action Service. On our side, we have a high-level group on internet governance, which involves members of the administrations of the member states. And basically, these two now on a regular basis talk to each other, and they they exchange information, so that information flows freely on our sides. It may sound obvious, but sometimes it isn’t, that two parallel channels may not actually exchange the information, even though they are discussing the same topic. I believe that with our new working methods, especially now during the Belgian presidency, this obstacle has been eliminated. But I fully understand what the gentleman said and I will take it back to my colleagues and my DG for reflection and for action.

Lucien Castex:
Thank you, Denise.

Dennis Redeker:
Yes, I think also going back to that wonderful question of how can we actually make the European Declaration of Digital Rights and Principles work. I think studying these documents, and there are many of them obviously, and yes, we should focus on whichever we think is the most useful for our organization, for our local context. I think personally that when we work in local communities and cities and companies, we should always read these documents and discuss internally how can we make this work for us. Because there is certainly a way for member states to streamline the declaration into activities on a national level. But what can also be very effective is if a large city or a small town takes on the activities they have with digital tools and digital governance. They engage with their citizens and use the declaration, use other documents like the International Rights and Principles Charter, and study them. Think about what are the human rights and principles that are at stake with the activities that we engage in as a company, as a municipality, and how can we actually implement it in an effective way. Ideally in concert obviously with national and EU institutions.

Lucien Castex:
Thank you. Thank you, Denise. Ana?

Ana Cristina Amoroso das Neves:
Well, we don’t have so much time, so I’ll be really brief. Well, I think that AERODIC is amazing, and it should be strengthened because it’s the right spot, the right place to be. the right events to spread the word and to know what we are doing in Europe. So, it’s very good that we had this session and that people become aware of the European Charter on Digital Principles and Rights. And just to inform you that every piece of legislation that European Union discusses, it has at the bottom line this European Charter. Thank you.

Paolo Grassia:
Indeed, following up on what Anna said, I totally agree also from the company’s viewpoint. There are a number of treaties, the enforcement and the interplay among them is not crystal clear sometimes, but then oftentimes these high-level principles are followed up by secondary legislation. For example, what happened to Article 8 of the European Charter of Human Rights on the privacy and confidentiality of communications, very important, that then was followed up by EU law on privacy and communication. So, that’s how companies and citizens do realize the importance of the treaty. Just very quickly to respond to the question on the sharing of data and the collaboration, there is a new law at EU level called the Data Act that also compels companies to share data in times of crisis and for exceptional circumstances with governmental bodies, for example, to deal with crisis. Now, companies and also regulators are busy with implementing that and there are some also projects, for example, there is stakeholder groups where we are also involved, hosted by the Commission on how to improve the sharing of data, including telecoms data for artistical purposes. Also, for example, environmental statistics. So, I’m happy also to follow up online because I have colleagues that follow specifically that group.

Moderator:
Thank you a lot, and sorry, we are out of time. And since we still are on our mics, but we can turn off it easily, because it’s time for break. Do we have a few minutes to conclude, or let’s go to have a break and conclude there? OK, so.

Lucien Castex:
I’ll be very quick. I would like to thank all the panelists, first off. Also, thanks, obviously, to the organizing team and all the people who participated to the session, the public, of course. I wanted to stress out that such session actually showcased the importance of the IGF at the global, local, and regional level. It’s a multi-stakeholder discussion, and we all participated. Thank you, everyone.

Moderator:
OK, so now, thank you a lot, firstly. And then I really suggest you to go for a coffee, some snacks, and come back here at 11.30. Thank you.