MORNING - Human Rights Council Holds Panel Discussion on Cyberbullying against Children, Hearing that It Affects One in Three Students from Ages 13 to 15 and Needs a Holistic Approach
Council Continues General Debate on Human Rights Situations that Require the Council’s Attention
The Human Rights Council this morning held a panel discussion on cyberbullying against children and continued the general debate on human rights situations that require the Council’s attention.
Nada Al-Nashif, United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, said bullying was a serious global issue, exacerbated by the use of new technologies and the digital environment: 130 million students, or one in three students from ages 13 to 15, experienced it. The World Health Organization described bullying in childhood as a major public health concern. Children subjected to bullying were more likely to skip school, performed less well on tests, and could suffer anxiety, fear and emotional distress, sleeplessness, and psychosomatic pain. Some instances of bullying had triggered suicide among children.
Ms. Al-Nashif said cyberbullying took bullying to the digital space, outside the confines of school or home. This was a complex topic that found itself at the intersection of human rights issues, digital issues and policy issues. To get this right, there needed to be a holistic approach, which addressed root causes, placing the rights and best interests of the child at the centre, focusing on the child being bullied as well as on the child or adult doing the bullying.
Philip Jaffé, Member of the Committee on the Rights of the Child and Director of the Centre for Children’s Rights Studies at the University of Geneva, panellist, said cyberbullying violated numerous children’s rights, including health and mental health, survival and development, education, rest and leisure, and privacy. The consequences were also very real, ranging from loss of self-esteem, dropping out of school, social withdrawal, and depression, all the way to physical self-harm and suicidal behaviour. With regard to what to do, Mr. Jaffé said that many States had made signification advances, but above all there needed to be a political will, as without it, it was impossible to raise public awareness.
Santa Rose Mary, Child Rights Advocate from Uganda, panellist, said she was a 15-year-old from Uganda who was a member of the Children’s Advisory Council. She understood cyber bullying occurred when a person shared personal information, a child’s personal information, shared contents of a child with other people, texted a child inappropriate messages and shared bad pictures and videos with a child. Ms. Mary urged the Government of Uganda to enforce a strict law on people who cyber bullied children. She also advised all schools to include digital literacy in the school syllabus to help children understand more about online safety. To parents, Ms. Mary requested all parents to teach children about the dangers of cyber bullying. To her fellow children, she encouraged them to report any case of cyber bullying they encountered or witnessed.
Yony Tsouna, Founder and Co-Director of Matzmichim, the Israeli Violence Reduction Organization, said that every day, children's social lives moved, little by little, toward the virtual world. Therefore, if children were going to live virtually, they must be taught how to manage themselves there, and how to take care of each other. Children learned how to behave through imitation, but they did not see their parents and teachers on social media. In light of this problem, Mr. Tsouna made four experience-based suggestions for action: dealing with the small, everyday online interactions and not just with the extreme 1 per cent; teaching children digital literacy; understanding cyberbullying; and speeding up the pace.
Deepali Liberhan, Safety Policy Director, Meta, said Meta had a muti-pronged approach to safety, the first being partnerships. Meta partnered with experts, taking guidance from them and incorporating this into its policies, tools and resources for its platforms on Facebook and Instagram. Meta had policies in place on what was acceptable to share on the platform. Bullying, harassment, abuse, graphic content and hate speech were not allowed in order to keep young people safe. While it was important to have policies, it was vitally important to be able to enforce those policies as well. Meta used a combination of user reports and proactive technologies to ensure policies were being enforced. Meta also provided tools, including anti-bullying features, for young people so that they could control their experience.
In the discussion, some speakers said the current fast-paced digital technological developments could help all children fully realise their human rights, including their right to education. However, this world could also bring threats to children, such as abuse, hate speech, harmful content, misinformation and cyberbullying. Cyberbullying had a negative impact on the fulfilment of children's right to protection against all forms of abuse and their development rights. Parents and caregivers played a fundamental role in protecting children from online risk. Schools and teachers also played a critical role in aiding parents to identify and address instances of cyber bullying in children. Some speakers said businesses also had a critical role and responsibility in addressing violence against children in the digital environment. States needed to ensure that businesses met these responsibilities, including through enacting and enforcing laws and regulations aimed at preventing violations of children’s right to protection from violence.
The Council then continued the general debate under agenda item four on human rights situations that require the Council’s attention, which began yesterday. A summary can be viewed here.
In the discussion, a number of speakers said that some countries practiced discrimination against refugees, with no legislation protecting them from injustice. The Council should ensure that refugees had protection in countries of asylum. A speaker appealed for the elimination of all unilateral sanctions and the establishment of a mechanism to compensate for the losses of the victims, especially children with disabilities: unilateral coercive measures threatened millions of lives worldwide. Speakers expressed deep concern for the ongoing criminalisation of human rights defenders, journalists and independent justice operators, and urged States to expand their ambition in helping to combat the crisis of impunity, including by exercising universal or other extra-territorial jurisdiction in relation to crimes under international law, and to deter further cycles of bloodshed.
Speaking in the panel discussion were Israel on behalf of a group of countries, Austria on behalf of a group of countries, Bulgaria on behalf of the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie, Paraguay on behalf of a group of countries, Indonesia on behalf of a group of countries, European Union, Türkiye on behalf of a group of countries, Luxembourg, United States, United Nations Children's Fund, Holy See, Malaysia, United Kingdom, Kazakhstan, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Madagascar, France, Costa Rica, Lithuania, Republic of Korea, United Arab Emirates, Germany, Chile and Malawi.
Also speaking were Conseil National des Droits de l'homme du Maroc, Make Mothers Matter, Beijing Children's Legal Aid and Research Centre, International Planned Parenthood Federation, Catholic International Education Office, and Save the Children International.
Speaking in the general debate were Arab-European Forum for Dialogue and Human Rights, Franciscans International, Le conseil universel des droits de l'homme, Platform for Youth Integration and Volunteerism, International Muslim Women's Union, Right Livelihood Award Foundation, Bachehaye Asemane Kamran Rehabilitation Institute, Global Srilankan Forum United Kingdom, Al Baraem Association for Charitable Work, Association of Iranian Short Statured Adults, International Service for Human Rights, Al-Haq, Law in the Service of Man, WomenNC-NC Committee for CSW/CEDAW, Edmund Rice International Limited,Organization for Poverty Alleviation and Development, Human Rights Watch, Institute for Human Rights, Amnesty International, United for Human Rights, Christian Solidarity Worldwide, CIVICUS - World Alliance for Citizen Participation, VIVAT International, Lawyers' Rights Watch Canada, Human Rights Research League, Association pour l'Intégration et le Développement Durable au Burundi, Alsalam Foundation, Stichting Global Human Rights Defence, Association MIMAN, Rencontre Africaine pour la defense des droits de l'homme, World Muslim Congress, International Action for Peace & Sustainable Development, Lidskoprávní organizace Práva a svobody obcanučů Turkmenistánu z.s., Iraqi Development Organization, Association Internationale pour l'égalité des femmes, Pasumai Thaayagam Foundation, Association Ma'onah for Human Rights and Immigration, Indigenous People of Africa Coordinating Committee, International-Lawyers.Org, Association Bharathi Centre Culturel Franco-Tamoul, and Villages Unis (United Villages).
The webcast of the Human Rights Council meetings can be found here. All meeting summaries can be found here. Documents and reports related to the Human Rights Council’s fifty-fourth regular session can be found here.
The Council will reconvene at 3 p.m. this afternoon to continue the general debate on agenda item four on human rights situations that require the Council’s attention, and to hold the annual half-day panel discussion on the rights of indigenous peoples.
Panel Discussion on Cyberbullying against Children
Opening Statement
NADA AL-NASHIF, United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, said bullying was a serious global issue, exacerbated by the use of new technologies and the digital environment: 130 million students, or one in three students from ages 13 to 15, experienced it. The World Health Organization described bullying in childhood as a major public health concern. Children subjected to bullying were more likely to skip school, performed less well on tests, and could suffer anxiety, fear and emotional distress, sleeplessness, and psychosomatic pain. Some instances of bullying had triggered suicide among children. Studies also showed far-reaching effects extending into adulthood, such as high prevalence of depression and unemployment. Cyberbullying took bullying to the digital space, outside the confines of school or home. It could involve sending offensive messages, email texts, or be conducted through social media, and could reach the threshold of threats, blackmail, intimidation and exploitation, involving sexual content.
The Committee on the Rights of the Child and the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities considered bullying, including cyberbullying, as a form of violence, affecting girls almost twice as much as boys, both as victims and perpetrators of cyberbullying. According to studies, cyberbullying was an avenue for further victimisation of those already experiencing traditional forms of bullying. Addressing it should target “traditional” forms of bullying to have a meaningful impact. Bullying effectively prevented the enjoyment of a wide range of human rights and States needed to address it as part of their obligations. Regional human rights courts found that failure to do so constituted a breach of States’ obligations under human rights law.
The Committee on the Rights of the Child and the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women recommended that States establish national programmes encompassing prevention. “Bullying in children: impact on child health”, which was developed for schools across Finland, was a successful example. However, States needed to ensure that measures taken against cyberbullying did not infringe upon children’s right to privacy and freedom of expression. The centrality and power of companies in the online space meant that the role and responsibility of companies producing such technology and managing platforms was crucial. States should ensure that companies addressed cyberbullying in the context of how children perceived and used digital technologies. The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights provided a framework for responsible business conduct in the technology sector.
This was a complex topic that found itself at the intersection of human rights issues, digital issues and policy issues. To get this right, there needed to be a holistic approach, which addressed root causes, placing the rights and best interests of the child at the centre, focusing on the child being bullied as well as on the child or adult doing the bullying.
Statements by the Panellists
PHILIP JAFFÉ, Member of the Committee on the Rights of the Child and Director of the Centre for Children’s Rights Studies at the University of Geneva, said first, for better and for worse, the vast majority of children on the planet lived in the digital world and there was no going back. Second, developments in the digital world were so vast and rapid that it was almost impossible to keep up. There was a need to regroup around basic human rights and children’s rights principles and efficient collaborative actions with all relevant stakeholders to address the issue of violence against children in the digital world and cyberbullying in particular. Cyberbullying was very real and affected about one in three children worldwide. Cyberbullying violated numerous children’s rights, including health and mental health, survival and development, education, rest and leisure, and privacy. The consequences were also very real, ranging from loss of self-esteem, dropping out of school, social withdrawal and depression, all the way to physical self-harm and suicidal behaviour. Victims were disproportionally children with disabilities, girls, and other vulnerable groups already targets of discrimination.
With regard to what to do, Mr. Jaffé acknowledged that many States had made signification advances, but above all there needed to be a political will, as without it, it was impossible to raise public awareness. There was a need for new legislation or amended legislation that criminalised certain online behaviours. Law enforcement needed to be trained. It must be ensured that children were consulted on what they experienced online and make them partners, and that they were provided with child friendly complaint mechanisms and pathways to access justice. There was also a need for massive investment in prevention, particularly in schools, with anti-bully and cyberbully training that involved and empowered children. And finally, above all, there needed to be a constant balancing act between the protection of children and respecting their privacy, their civil and political rights, and their freedom of expression and participation.
SANTA ROSE MARY, Child Rights Advocate from Uganda, said she was a 15-year-old from Uganda who was a member of the Children’s Advisory Council. She understood cyber bullying occurred when a person shared personal information, a child’s personal information, shared contents of a child with other people, texting a child inappropriate messages, and sharing bad pictures and videos with a child that could cause harm to a child. Once a child had experienced such things, they could develop mental issues. A child could even drop out of school due to the shame experienced from cyber bullying or even face kidnapping if their home address was leaked. A child could also commit suicide due to cyber bullying. Ms. Mary urged the Government of Uganda to enforce a strict law on people who cyber bullied children. She also advised all schools to include digital literacy in the school syllabus to help children understand more about online safety. To parents, Ms. Mary requested all parents to teach children about the dangers of cyber bullying. To her fellow children, she encouraged them to report any case of cyber bullying they encountered or witnessed.
YONY TSOUNA, Founder and Co-Director of Matzmichim, the Israeli Violence Reduction Organization, said every day, children's social lives moved, little by little, toward the virtual world. Therefore, if children were going to live virtually, they must be taught how to manage themselves there, and how to take care of each other. The most obvious thing to do was to only deal with the roughest aspects of social media – paedophilia, threats, distribution of intimate photos – but these were just 1 per cent of everyday online bullying. Children’s lives were full of "grey area" suffering: offensive stickers, insulting surveys, harmful comments. Education systems focused a lot on treating children who had already been victims of online bullying, but it was better to teach children to behave online in a healthy way.
Children learned how to behave through imitation, but they did not see their parents and teachers on social media. In light of this problem, Mr. Tsouna made four experience-based suggestions for action: dealing with the small, everyday online interactions and not just with the extreme 1 per cent; teaching children digital literacy; understanding cyberbullying; and speeding up the pace. Social media training needed to be given by those who regularly worked directly with kids, so that the changing challenges could be faced practically and effectively. In this sense, educational non-governmental organizations that trained and developed within classrooms had better chances to succeed. Unfortunately, there were too few of these.
As the world of social media continued to expand, adults, children and classrooms must be trained to identify and neutralise the use of online hate tactics, especially those done by socially-abled kids trying to achieve popularity. Children needed this now, and would need this more as grown-ups, because the area where cyberbullying may be the most dangerous was in politics: all sitting in this room were at risk of aging under the leadership of populist online bullies who used divisive hate in their personal struggle for social power.
DEEPALI LIBERHAN, Safety Policy Director, Meta, said she wanted to provide context to the audience on how companies like Meta thought about safety. Meta had a muti-pronged approach to safety, the first being partnerships. Meta partnered with experts, taking guidance from them and incorporating this into its policies, tools and resources for its platforms on Facebook and Instagram. Meta had policies in place on what was acceptable to share on the platform. Bullying, harassment, abuse, graphic content and hate speech were not allowed in order to keep young people safe. While it was important to have policies, it was vitally important to be able to enforce those policies as well. Meta used a combination of user reports and proactive technologies to ensure policies were being enforced.
Meta also provided tools, including anti-bullying features, for young people so that they could control their experience. If they were being bullied, they could block, mute or restrict. Meta also had proactive technology that helped identify a comment and issue a comment warning. Parental supervision tools allowed parents or guardians to have key insights into the online experience of young people. Resources on bullying were also important and Meta had launched Get Digital, a tool available for educators, allowing them to talk about these issues with students, with lessons on how to prevent bullying and how to talk to young people about bullying and harassment. It was important to provide these resources to young people, to enable them to stay safe online. Meta was committed to working with multiple stakeholders to keep young people safe on the platform.
Discussion
In the discussion, some speakers said they valued the space to discuss the intersection between digital technologies and harassment. It was important to consider particularities such as the wide reach of the digital space, continuous access, permanence and easy distribution of online content, and lack of appropriate oversight.
The current fast-paced digital technological developments could help all children fully realise their human rights, including their right to education. The digital world offered opportunities for learning, playing and developing skills. However, this world could also bring threats to children, such as abuse, hate speech, harmful content, misinformation and cyberbullying. Cyberbullying had a negative impact on the fulfilment of children's right to protection against all forms of abuse and their development rights. It was affecting a high percentage of children, especially girls, compromising their health. Some speakers said that one of the biggest problems with cyberbullying was that it never stopped. It was not physical, but mental and psychological, making it difficult to notice in young children and even adults. Young people needed to be protected from the dangers of the internet.
A number of speakers said the comprehensive protection of the rights of children required their active participation, as well as that of their families, communities, societies and the private sector. Parents and caregivers played a fundamental role in protecting children from online risk. While States had the responsibility to provide legal and social frameworks that adequately promoted the rights of children to be free from discrimination, parents were uniquely capable of knowing the intellectual and emotional maturity of their children and providing the necessary support to protect them from harm. Schools and teachers also played a critical role in aiding parents to identify and address instances of cyber bullying in children. It was important that teachers were trained in this regard.
Some speakers said that general comment 25 of the Committee on the Rights of the Child provided guidance on legislative and other measures, and also emphasised that the best interests of the child should be at the heart of all actions. It was essential to implement the Declaration on the Rights of the Child in the digital environment and to promote its principles nationally, regionally and internationally.
Businesses also had a critical role and responsibility in addressing violence against children in the digital environment, some speakers said. States needed to ensure that businesses met these responsibilities, including through enacting and enforcing laws and regulations aimed at preventing violations of children’s right to protection from violence. Businesses should undertake child rights due diligence and implement the highest standards of ethics, privacy and safety in relation to the design and operation of their services. Businesses should also provide safe, child-friendly, and accessible methods for children to report issues and seek appropriate support. There was a need to foster a policy of zero tolerance for all forms of violence against children in the digital environment, including technology-facilitated gender-based violence.
Some speakers outlined national steps taken to ensure the safety of children in the digital world and prevent cyber bullying. These included laws to protect children against grooming; and initiating campaigns to prevent cyber bullying, among others. Speakers also asked questions, including which strategies might be appropriate to constructively involve the business sector in efforts against cyberbullying? How could States best collaborate with the private sector to enhance responses to cyber bullying? What were some of the preferred resources for parents and caregivers looking to keep their children safe online? How could children’s online literacy be improved, to ensure that advice about online safety and etiquette was accessible to as many children as possible, to help prevent cyberbullying worldwide?
Concluding Remarks
PHILIP JAFFÉ, Member of the Committee on the Rights of the Child and Director of the Centre for Children’s Rights Studies at the University of Geneva, said it was refreshing to see in the debate the presence of several young persons. It must be quite disconcerting for young people and children to hear adults worry about online violence and bullying when they lived every day in schools where bullying occurred. The first efforts that communities and States could make was to make safe schools, where everybody felt included and could spend their days learning and playing safely. On intersectionality and children with disabilities - they were discriminated against online, but also in their communities and schools, and there needed to be work done to ensure they were given the same amount of attention as any other child. On prevention for children with disabilities, there may need to be adjustments made - they were not a homogenous group.
The best line of defence against the bullying phenomenon was the intervention of witnesses and bystanders, and this could happen to a certain extent online as well. The notion of zero tolerance was also an important one - it was a goal that was somewhat lofty, but a worthy goal. There had to be great care as to how other rights were infringed in the process: restrictions on online activities were not the right way to go. The role of parents was also important. The multi-pronged, multi-sectoral approach was vital.
SANTA ROSE MARY, Child Rights Advocate from Uganda, said with regard to what challenges were being addressed to keep children safe from cyber-bullying, schools should include lessons on digital safety for children, to create awareness for children, and have rules and regulations on cyberbullying, with penalties for breaching them. She hoped that today’s discussion would greatly reduce the incidents of bullying worldwide. If all United Nations Member States today stood together to fight this phenomenon, she believed that it could be ended, making a better world for children and adults.
YONY TSOUNA, Founder and Co-Director of Matzmichim, the Israeli Violence Reduction Organization, said hearing the responses from States made him more optimistic. He had not grown up in the world of social media and knew he needed to talk to children about this more than to adults. Rules were really important; they helped adults to teach children. States were encouraged to continue with rules, but to try and work with children about norms. For example, sometimes children would not tag everyone in their photo which caused great pain to other children, but such an issue was not addressed in any school rules.
Most of the risks online came from children and their friends, and efforts needed to be directed in this regard. States needed to learn from the great revolution of “Me Too” where women shared knowledge and learnt to identify what micro-aggressions looked like. It was important that children learnt from their peers, to learn about unbalanced friendship. Private companies could do great things for children, but only when children were the ones to craft the message. After COVID-19, many more children had committed suicide and developed mental health issues. Mr. Tsouna encouraged all States to build bridges for the sake of the children.
DEEPALI LIBERHAN, Safety Policy Director, Meta, said Meta had adopted a best interest of the child framework, as guided by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. It was important to prioritise the well-being and safety of teens over business interests and to make sure that team privacy was supported in all product decisions. It was important to balance teen autonomy while considering the rights and autonomies of parents. Education and creating awareness were the most important thing. Young people could be educated online, but it was also important to do it offline.
Meta had created youth ambassadors, which allowed young people to be role models. This was an area where States could come together and provide a mass outreach on education and online safety. Meta knew they were responsible for keeping young people safe on their platforms and were committed to this, through ensuring they had the right policies in place. The organization worked with experts and academics to ensure that young people using their platform were protected.
General Debate on Human Rights Situations that Require the Council’s Attention
The general debate on human rights situations that require the Council’s attention started in the previous meeting and a summary can be found here.
General Debate
A number of speakers said that in spite of the Council’s efforts to improve the situation for refugees, Government policies were gravely impacting their situation, and they faced all types of grave violations. The Council must deal with the documented reports of the loss of hundreds of child refugees from shelters. Some countries practiced discrimination against refugees, with no legislation protecting them from injustice. The Council should ensure they had protection in countries of asylum. Further, said a speaker, the Human Rights Council should take action to ensure all allegations of violations against refugees were investigated by a United Nations body, in accordance with international standards, and that those responsible were held to account.
If the problems posed by racism and fundamentalism were not addressed immediately, there was a risk of losing constitutional democracy, a speaker said. The right to development was an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human person and all people were entitled to participate in, contribute to and enjoy economic, political, social and cultural development. It was the responsibility of all democratic forces to save the future of the young generation and create an atmosphere where they could get medical aid and social support.
The world was suffering from natural, economic, social and political crises, from pandemics to wars, as well as natural disasters such as storms, floods and earthquakes. This was while the imposition of economic sanctions on countries in order to secure the political interests of sanctioning States, unilaterally and with disregard to all United Nations reports and resolutions, led to collective punishment of the people of the target countries and all companies of third countries on a large scale, a speaker said, appealing for the elimination of all unilateral sanctions and the establishment of a mechanism to compensate for the losses of the victims, especially children with disabilities: unilateral coercive measures threatened millions of lives worldwide.
The availability of information had created a large space to disseminate ideas to youth, whether ideas of peace or discrimination. Youth had become the victims of unregulated media, which did not take into consideration its impact on the personalities of young people, who did not want a future that promoted hatred and the rejection of others, but rather a future that respected human rights. There should be an increased awareness of the risks of hate speech among young people, and an adoption of policies to address hate speech in mass communication.
Speakers expressed deep concern for the ongoing criminalisation of human rights defenders, journalists and independent justice operators, and urged States to expand their ambition in helping to combat the crisis of impunity, including by exercising universal or other extra-territorial jurisdiction in relation to crimes under international law, and to deter further cycles of bloodshed.
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
HRC23.128e