Article background
The EDVAW Platform of Independent Expert Mechanisms was created in March 2018 through the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women. It comprises seven UN and regional women’s human rights mechanisms that respond to violence and discrimination against women to enhance communication and coordination among those institutions as regard to the CEDAW-intended political and practical enforcement.
Because of the increase of the online and technology facilitated violence on women during the COVID-19 pandemic, EDVAW Platform arranged a focused discussion in June 2022 on this emerging issue. After that, it pledged to produce a thematic paper that will analysehow different women’s rights mechanisms have addressed digital violence against women. This paper aims to discuss frequent approaches and raise awareness within the members of the platform to better address the issue of VAW next.
The thematic report is organized into six sections, which include: Brief findings of the current nature, size, and consequences of the phenomenon of virtual aggression against women. An overview of how EDVAW mechanisms has addressed digital violence. Member-generated analysis of themes concerning this type of violence evident in EDVAW’s work. The promising practices for combating the digital violence the promising practices for combating the digital violence. Problems affecting EDVAW mechanisms. The actions that must be taken with regard the conflict of violence against women online. This endeavour’s goals are to bring the mechanisms together to improve how they address what has become an escalating issue – violence against women online.
Article classification
This thematic paper focuses on human rights, gender-based violence, and the relationship between technology and law in the field of legal and social policy research. It examines the strategies and actions implemented by international and regional human rights organizations to address violence against women, especially in digital spaces, including policies and legal frameworks.
Article Summary
In the thematic paper on the topic, ‘Innovations in the Digital Environment: Innovations in Violence Against Women (VAW)’ looks at how use of technology makes VAW possible such as cyber-stalking, sharing of pictures without consent and the production of pornographic videos using a woman’s image. It focuses on six main areas: features like definition, estimation rate, and the operation mode of digital VAW, acknowledging that 85% of women in some area experience cyber-ANS including online abuse; framework connected to digital VAW using different names but performs the function of eliminating it; topics like intersection of offline and cyber VAW; the role of Internet; and prevention measures against digital VAW. This article also talks about changes and programs from harbouring legal crusades as well as aiding victims of abuse in countries such as Brazil and Romania; but these are progressively being challenged by problems like the absence of comprehensive data gathering that relate to overseeing technology companies. finally, it indicates the future action of international organization and private companies for improvement of the measures against digital violence.
Main Point
The designation ‘digital dimension’ of VAW refers to any act of gendered violence that occurs, is facilitated or amplified by technology. Digital vow encompasses a range of negative behaviours executed or facilitated by ICTs including smartphone, social media platforms, the internet, emails, and artificial intelligence. Besides, it focuses on different critical types of digital violence: cyberstalking, doxing, sharing intimate materials without a person’s consent, online harassment, new threats such as deepfake pornography – the material containing an individual, who was misrepresented by AI software to engage in sexual activities. Such bad actions often target women just for being women, thereby preserving existing gender inequalities and hatred for women on the Internet.
More than simple harassment, digital violence on women involves theft of her identities or her information, malicious use of her pictures, sexual abuse, and other forms of violations of her privacy and honour. This is because just like the modality of digital VAW, it is both extensive and invasive. Digital abuse does not like traditional VAW where the perpetrator cannot reach the victims or when they are in different regions. They have the opportunity to select their prey anywhere at any one time actually and furthermore are a constant threat that cannot be easily eradicated.
In addition, it occurred that online systems make it possible for an abuser to perform actions devoid of repercussions because of the anonymity and geographical detachment they afford. This is because most women from different regions own and frequently use digital devices and platforms and therefore can be subjected to such violence; however, some women face even worse circumstances because of compounded factors resulting from different forms of prejudice.
The paper examines intersectionality in terms of digital violence, noting that the impact of online abuse differs and for women. More often than not, digital violence intersects with other facets of social, economic, and cultural virilisation, which makes the harm worse for women who experience racism, ethnic, sexual, or work-related discriminative measures, disability or career status discriminative measures. For example, women and personalities in the public domain are vulnerable to cyber threats of the extreme kind with aims of silencing them from the media.
The sorts of abuse they experience are generally more aggressive and constant, incorporating gender-related harassment with threats associated with professional ostentation. In the same way, women of colour, queer women, disabled women, and women from the global south often experience worst and more persistent digital harassment because they suffer discrimination based on race, sexual orientation or disability.
For example, the paper shares examples of works indicating that WoC are targeted for racism and sexism simultaneously while using the internet. Heterosexual cisgender women, and other marginalized groups, including members of the LGBTQ+ community, and those with disability, are at a higher risk of cyberbullying and harassment of their gender and other aspects of their identity. This perspective that integrates the different problem areas emphasizes the importance of justice and favourable resources that are sensitive to such complex phenomena as discrimination.
Dealing with these difficulties necessitates robust legal changes, and the document delves into the different measures global entities have implemented to make digital violence illegal. Organizations such as CEDAW and the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women have pushed for the outlawing of certain forms of online abuse, such as cyberstalking, non-consensual image sharing (often called “revenge porn”), and digital harassment. These efforts have led to substantial legislative advancements in various countries, with the introduction of new laws or expansion of existing ones to cover online and technology-enabled violence. Nevertheless, the article also highlights various persistent obstacles in addressing online violence against women (VAW).
A significant challenge is the lack of consistency in the terminology and definitions used in different jurisdictions. Although international organizations may use terms such as “online violence,” “cyberviolence,” or “technology-facilitated abuse,” these terms may be understood differently or not acknowledged in the legal frameworks of certain countries. This lack of consistency results in gaps in enforcement and protection, enabling perpetrators of digital violence to take advantage of these legal uncertainties to avoid being held accountable. The issue of digital violence becomes more complex when it crosses borders, as domestic laws may not be sufficient to address harm caused by perpetrators in other countries.
Furthermore, there is a significant lack of all-encompassing legal systems addressing the complete spectrum of digital violence against women. Although certain countries have outlawed acts such as revenge porn and cyberstalking, many types of digital violence still lack legal consequences. For instance, the creation and distribution of deepfake pornography, a rapidly growing form of abuse, is not explicitly prohibited in many regions. This lack of legal clarity means that victims of digital violence often face significant challenges in seeking justice, as their abusers can perpetrate these acts without the fear of prosecution.
The paper concludes that although advancements have been achieved, there is a pressing need for unified international legal frameworks, more precise definitions, and enhanced mechanisms to ensure that perpetrators are held accountable across borders. It also emphasizes the crucial role of private tech companies in combating digital violence, as they are uniquely positioned to prevent, mitigate, and respond to online abuse through improved moderation, reporting systems, and collaboration with law enforcement.
Analysis and critique
The paper gives clear elaboration of how different mechanisms under the EDVAW Platform have dealt with the issue of digital violence against women. Despite this, it is successful in establishing the pervasiveness of the issue, mapping out the various responses from various organizations, sometimes, the positions may fail to elaborate on specific facets of digital violence for instance, the role of the private internet firms. However, the paper only briefly mentions intersectionality and does not focus on other aspects of this issue as a rather significant part of the work is devoted to professional women without discussing other categories of women – the ones being most affected, for instance, the rural women.
The main advantage of the paper is the followed approach recognizing international and regional human rights frameworks and highlighting best practices. However, it fails to provide specifics of the measures or policies that may define state’s ability to attend adequately to the dynamic nature of digital violence. The proposed remedies as laudable as the analytical framework provided, are rather conceptual, and there is a lack of discussion addressing how these measures can be put into practice especially in developing world that lacks sufficient internet governance.
Supporting Evidence
For the purpose of this report, the author relies heavily on statistical studies with data obtained from reputable organizations such as UN Women, Amnesty International, and the United Nations Broadband Commission. These works show how prevalent digital violence is and how different it is in regions that are different.
For instance, the paper cites a UN report done in 2015, showing that seventy-three percent of the women around the world have experienced some form of cyber-violence. Closely related to this, a recent survey conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit in 45 countries shows that 85% of women are either victims of, or witnesses to, digital violence (2020). These figures support some of the arguments of the paper concerning the international aspect of the problem. In this way, while the report generalises the need for legal reforms to address cyber-violence, it provides particular examples from Brazil and Romania that demonstrate this is feasible.
But the report could provide more details regarding the effects of these changes in legal regulations. for instance, what happened to prosecution rates, or the support for the victims after changes, so the picture of success of the actions mentioned would be more complete.
Major Concerns
Perhaps, the main problem of the paper is a weak analysis of the provided problems that refer to internet platforms and social media companies. Despite acknowledging the involvement of these actors in fostering online violence the document does not spare much effort in presenting the measures, flaws of the self-regulation, or the platforms responsible for the same.
Moreover, the absence of standard vocabulary to name digital violence against women in different frameworks hampers international cooperation, to which the paper also pays attention, but it does not study it in detail. The second issue is that there is little information available about the current laws that demonstrate their effectiveness. The paper uses examples of countries that have criminalized certain types of digital violence but does not contrast what these laws have done to the rate of such offenses and the availability of justice to victims.
Conclusion/ Comparison
Thus, this paper provides the needed approach to analysing violence against women in the digital context, and it is high time to turn our attention to legal changes, awareness, and cooperation between international bodies. This is even though the document, like other thematic papers on violence against women, offers a detailed look at online and technology facilitated violence.
However, it could use more of quantitative data and focus more on the concept of private firms as enablers or inhibitors of digital violence. Future research can perhaps look at practical implications of these legal changes and look at the part which Internet platforms can play in more action-oriented and specific way, which could lead to better collaboration internationally to deal with violence against women online.
Author Name- Adv. Riyaa Dahat, LLM, SLS Pune, BA.LLB, DES’s SNFLC, Pune.
