{"id":96249,"date":"2022-10-13T17:52:19","date_gmt":"2022-10-13T17:52:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/yogaesoteric.net\/?p=96249"},"modified":"2022-10-13T17:52:19","modified_gmt":"2022-10-13T17:52:19","slug":"paving-a-digital-road-to-hell-digital-id-systems-could-lead-to-severe-irreversible-human-rights-violations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/yogaesoteric.net\/en\/paving-a-digital-road-to-hell-digital-id-systems-could-lead-to-severe-irreversible-human-rights-violations\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Paving a Digital Road to Hell\u2019: Digital ID Systems Could Lead to Severe, Irreversible Human Rights Violations"},"content":{"rendered":"

The authors of a new report on digital identity systems warned<\/a> \u201cthe actual and potential<\/em>\u201d human rights violations arising from the digital ID model can be \u201csevere and potentially irreversible<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The 100-page report<\/a> \u2014 \u201cPaving the Road to Hell? A Primer on the Role of the World Bank and Global Networks in Promoting Digital ID<\/em>\u201d \u2014 published by New York University\u2019s (NYU) Center for Human Rights and Global Justice urged human rights organizations to heed the threats posed by a global push for digital IDs.<\/p>\n

The NYU researchers said many proponents \u2014 including the World Bank \u2014 portray digital IDs as a means to achieving greater inclusivity and environmental sustainability when, in fact, the systems are likely to do just the opposite.<\/p>\n

According to the report, the digital ID has been dressed up as an \u201cunstoppable juggernaut and inevitable hallmark of modernity and development in the 21st century<\/em>,\u201d causing dissenting voices to be \u201cwritten off as Luddites and barriers to progress<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

The authors argued for open debate \u201cwith full transparency and involving all relevant stakeholders<\/em>,\u201d including the most marginalized and most vulnerable.<\/p>\n

The authors, who include Christiaan van Veen, L.L.M., special advisor on new technologies and human rights to the United Nations, urged the human rights community and related civic society organizations to ensure that global decisions about the adoption of digital ID systems are not hastily made but are based on \u201cserious evidence and analysis<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

Where digital ID systems threaten human rights, the NYU researchers said, such endeavors should be \u201cstopped altogether.\u201d<\/p>\n

Who\u2019s really profiting?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cGovernments around the world have been investing heavily in digital identification systems, often with biometric components<\/em>,\u201d the authors said in a statement.<\/p>\n

Digital ID systems that frequently collect biometric data \u2014 such as fingerprints, iris or other facial feature recognition \u2014 are being adopted to replace or complement non-digital government identification systems.<\/p>\n

According to an Access Now<\/em> special report, in India in October 2021, digital ID systems \u2014 or \u201cBig ID programs<\/em>\u201d as Access Now<\/em> called them \u2014 are being pushed by a market of actors who sell and profit from digital ID systems and infrastructure, often while endangering the human rights of the people they\u2019re supposed to benefit.<\/p>\n

The NYU researchers reached the same conclusion:<\/p>\n

\u201cThe rapid proliferation of such systems is driven by a new development consensus, packaged and promoted by key global actors like the World Bank, but also by governments, foundations, vendors and consulting firms<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

Digital ID proponents argue the systems can contribute to inclusivity and sustainable development, with some going so far as to consider the adoption of digital ID systems a prerequisite for the realization of human rights.<\/p>\n

But the NYU researchers said they believe the \u201cultimate objective<\/em>\u201d of digital ID systems is to \u201cfacilitate economic transactions and private sector service delivery while also bringing new, poorer, individuals into formal economies and \u2018unlocking\u2019 their behavioral data<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThe promises of inclusion and flourishing digital economies might appear attractive on paper<\/em>,\u201d the researchers said, \u201cbut digital ID systems have consistently failed to deliver on these promises in real world situations, especially for the most marginalized<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

The authors added:<\/p>\n

\u201cIn fact, evidence is emerging from many countries, most notably the mega digital ID project Aadhaar in India, of the severe and large-scale human rights violations linked to this model. These systems may in fact exacerbate pre-existing forms of exclusion and discrimination in public and private services. The use of new technologies may furthermore lead to novel forms of harm, including biometric exclusion, discrimination, and the many harms associated with \u2018surveillance capitalism.\u2019<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n

The benefits of using digital ID are \u201cill-defined<\/em>\u201d and \u201cpoorly documented<\/em>,\u201d the NYU authors said.<\/p>\n

\u201cFrom what evidence does exist, it seems that those who stand to benefit most may not be those \u2018left behind,\u2019 but instead a small group of companies and governments<\/em>,\u201d they wrote.<\/p>\n

They added:<\/p>\n

\u201cAfter all, where digital ID systems have tended to excel is in generating lucrative contracts for biometrics companies and enhancing the surveillance and migration-control capabilities of governments<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

More harm than good, especially for world\u2019s most marginalized<\/strong><\/p>\n

The authors did four things in their report.<\/p>\n

First, they examined the human rights impact of national digital ID systems and argued that a cost-benefit analysis of digital ID systems suggests they do more harm than good \u2014 especially for the world\u2019s most marginalized individuals.<\/p>\n

\u201cThrough the embrace of digital technologies, the World Bank and a broader global network of actors has been promoting a new paradigm for ID systems that prioritizes what we refer to as \u2018economic identity,\u2019<\/em>\u201d the authors wrote.<\/p>\n

They added:<\/p>\n

\u201cThese systems focus on fueling digital transactions and transforming individuals into traceable data. They often ignore the ability of identification systems to recognize not only that an individual is unique, but that they have a legal status with associated rights.<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cStill, proponents have cloaked this new paradigm in the language of human rights and inclusion, arguing that such systems will help to achieve multiple Sustainable Development Goals<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

The authors added:<\/p>\n

\u201cLike physical roads, national digital identification systems with biometric components (digital ID systems) are presented as the public infrastructure of the digital future.<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cYet these particular infrastructures have proven to be dangerous, having been linked to severe and large-scale human rights violations in a range of countries around the world, affecting social, civil, and political rights<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

Prioritizing \u2018economic identity\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n

Next, the researchers looked at how an \u201cidentification for development<\/em>\u201d agenda driven by multiple global actors came into being.<\/p>\n

They discussed the digital ID system called Aadhaar<\/em> that is currently being tried out by the government of India and the digital ID system promoted by the World Bank \u2014 Identification for Development, commonly called the ID4D Initiative.<\/p>\n

The ID4D Initiative draws inspiration from the highly criticized Aadhaar<\/em> digital ID system in India.<\/p>\n

In the Aadhaar<\/em> system, individuals are voluntarily assigned a 12-digit random number by the Unique Identification Authority of India \u2014 a statutory authority backed by the government of India \u2014 that establishes the \u201cuniqueness\u201d of individuals with the help of demographic and biometric technologies.<\/p>\n

This digital ID model, NYU report authors said, is dangerous because it prioritizes an \u201ceconomic identity\u201d for an individual.<\/p>\n

The model is not about an individual\u2019s identity alone, confirmed Joseph Atick, Ph.D., executive chairman of the influential ID4Africa, a platform where African governments and major companies in the digital ID market meet.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s about their economic interactions, Atick said.<\/p>\n

The ID4D model \u201cenables and interacts with authentication platforms, payments systems, digital signatures, data sharing, KYC systems, consent management and sectoral delivery platforms<\/em>,\u201d Atick announced at the start of ID4Africa\u2019s 2022 annual meeting in mid-June, at the Palais de Congr\u00e8s in Marrakesh, Morocco.<\/p>\n

The authors of the NYU report criticized this model:<\/p>\n

\u201cThe goal then, is not so much identity as it is identification. The three interlinked processes of identification, registration, and authorization are an exercise of power.<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cThrough this process, one actor acknowledges or denies another actor\u2019s identity attributes. Individuals may be empowered through the process of identification, but such systems have long been used for the opposite purpose: to deny rights to certain groups and exclude them<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

Third, the authors assessed the nitty-gritty details of how the World Bank and its network of proponents of digital ID systems worked to implement an \u201cidentification for development<\/em>\u201d agenda around the globe.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

They explained how the funding and governance of the ID4D Initiative operate, and claimed the World Bank and its corporate and governmental partners are \u201cmanufacturing consensus<\/em>\u201d by presuming that the shift to a digital ID model is inevitable, desirable and required for human progress.<\/p>\n

But this \u201cmanufactured consensus\u201d lacks a basis, they said.<\/p>\n

\u201cConcrete and robust evidence of the purported benefits associated with digital ID systems is rarely provided, it is merely asserted that digital ID will lead to inclusion and development<\/em>,\u201d the authors wrote.<\/p>\n

3 steps privacy advocates can take<\/strong><\/p>\n

Finally, the authors outlined what human rights organizations and other civil society actors can do by highlighting three modes of action:<\/p>\n