![]() More recently, the ICC tried a case focused on war crimes allegedly perpetrated in Timbuktu, Mali. While the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC also relied on other information, without those posts, there would have been no case. ![]() Those videos became critical evidence of his alleged crimes. In 20, the ICC issued warrants of arrest for Libyan warlord Al-Werfalli when a series of videos posted to social media showcased his possible involvement in the extrajudicial killings of 33 people. The potential human rights uses of such content are multiple: preserving a historical record of war featuring the experiences of sometimes hard-to-reach communities, so that journalists and human rights researchers can effectively report on what is happening and ensuring that investigators and researchers know what is happening in the world and can capture critical evidence before its removal.Īn example from the International Criminal Court (ICC) is telling. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Doing so would ensure companies better comply with the U.N. Non-governmental organizations around the world–including the Human Rights Center at UC Berkeley, Human Rights Watch, WITNESS, Mnemonic and others–have long called for social media companies to preserve conflict-related posts–especially posts that could be valuable evidence of international crimes but are at risk of removal for violating companies’ graphic content policies. The Board also recommended that Meta “commit to preserving, and where appropriate, sharing with competent authorities evidence of atrocity crimes or grave human rights violations, such as those specified in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.” To do this responsibly, they determined, Meta would need a protocol specific to “conflict situations.” Such clarity would be incredibly helpful for people around the world who are trying to share what’s happening in war-affected regions but are confused about whether their posts will be deleted. First, it recommended that Meta create greater clarity and transparency around when conflict-connected content will be left up or taken down, especially with regards to posts that depict prisoners of war. While the Board could have limited its commentary to the specific case, it leveraged the opportunity to issue a series of suggestions related to conflict-related posts generally. ![]() The Oversight Board ultimately agreed with Meta’s decision to leave the graphic video up but with an age restriction and a warning to protect potential viewers, including the POWs’ family members.Īs important as this decision is, it is the accompanying recommendations that are exceptionally important. Known as the “ Armenian prisoners of war video case,” the central issue the case raised before the Board was whether a Facebook post of prisoners of war (POWs) should have been taken down to protect the prisoners’ dignity and security, as provided for in Geneva Convention Article 13 on the humane treatment of prisoners, or left up because it was newsworthy. Recommending a Protocol for Conflict-Related Content On June 13, Meta’s Oversight Board–an organization that issues binding decisions related to the company’s content moderation challenges–released a ruling and series of recommendations that may have far-reaching ripples for the human rights and international criminal legal communities. This article is cross-posted at Just Security. A woman walks through an Armenian housing complex destroyed through bombardment from Azerbaijan in Nagorno Karabakh, Oct.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |