UN report: ROADMAP FOR DIGITAL COOPERATION

"The world is at a critical inflection point for technology governance, made more urgent by the ongoing pandemic"

"It is important to redouble efforts to better harness the potential of digital technologies while mitigating the harm

that they may cause"

"Digital technology does not exist in a vacuum – it has enormous potential for positive change, but can also reinforce and magnify existing fault lines and worsen economic and other inequalities."

It's problematic on digital ID .. rooted in Article 6 of the UDHR & Article 16 of the ICCPR that everyone has the right to recognition as a person before the law & transforming that into what as become an imperative under UNSDG 16.9 to create a legal identity for all .. & then

transforming the legal identity imperative into an imperative to a digital ID for all ... as a human right. It's an imperative that has become the dominant narrative of policy makers and international organisations like the World Bank or the UN & it's agencies, and of

powerful commercial interests now promoting digital ID as a human right. It's a narrative that is in the main absent the lived experiences and the voice of the beneficiaries - identity by who, for whom and whose terms?

And yes while the report like many, stress the importance

of data protection and privacy frameworks that " preserves people’s privacy and control over their information" and that " has to be built upon a foundation of user agency and choice, informed consent" ... & if we reflect on the UNHCR & its data protection policy, DP guidance &

guidance on registration & identity management, we find that these are ambiguous & may not meet the suggestion of informed consent. For example, in urs DP guidance, the UNCHR does not prescribe a legitimate basis and leaves that to the controller "assisted by the data protection

social point," and the practical circumstances of processing will determine the most appropriate basis to legitimise processing, and argues on the matter of consent, that

"given the vulnerability of most beneficiaries and the nature of humanitarian emergencies, many humanitarian organizations will not be in a position to rely on consent for most of their personal data processing", So wrt to his latest report, we need to ask questions about these

ambiguities and contradictions .. and again, questions of genuine human agency in creating digital IDs .. there is also the fact organisations like the UN are not subject to data protection laws such as the GDPR or binding frameworks such as the @coe Convention 108+

So what is the process of legal redress for those subject to creating digital IDs that represent their legal identity in the context of humanitarian action for example in esp countries with no or weak data protection laws?

But the report is welcome for casting additional light on the issues and challenges of digital identity reimagined as a digital legal national identity and that 'digital identity' must be "good' .. but then I ask myself, whose definition of good & to what degree are the voices of

of the beneficiaries of this "good' ID reflected in policy, in law, and in the design of 'good' digital identity systems.

The report discusses digital connectivity, public goods, digital inclusion, capacity building https://www.un.org/en/content/digital-cooperation-roadmap/assets/pdf/Roadmap_for_Digital_Cooperation_EN.pdf

the report also raises concerns about surveillance tech, inc facial recognition and the use of AI in ID.