As delivered by Bjørn Berge, Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe

 

Rector of the University of Warsaw, prof. Nowak;

Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs for the Republic of Poland, Mr Wisniewski;

Secretary General of the Community of Democracies,

Distinguished guests,

Ladies and gentlemen,

It is a great pleasure to be back here in the Polish capital – and this distinguished university.

Warsaw – and indeed Poland – have been central to so many of the defining trends, struggles and moments of European history.

This, of course, has not changed.

With the appalling Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine, our continent is witnessing the return of an “old ghost” – violent, aggressive nationalism, combined with utopian dreams of re-establishing an empire.

At the same time, we have also seen the rise of populism, anti-rights movements, and disinformation, fake news and hate speech throughout our Continent, and beyond.

We have seen minorities targeted, institutions undermined, and our political discourse severely polarised.

The result is democratic backsliding – and forces that continuously undermine our democracies in various ways.

Not that democracy is perfect, but it is by far the best model that we have to preserve, protect and promote fundamental human rights.

But democracy is also a process, where we participate, contribute and see how we can improve, strengthen and further develop it. And maybe here new technologies can also help us, while being in many ways a “double-edged sword.”

Over the last decades or so, we have far too often taken our rights for granted, certainly many young people do that, but the reality is that today we really must stand up and fight for our values and fundamental human rights.

In this sense the Russian invasion of Ukraine has certainly been a big “wake-up call” for all of us.

Last year, the Council of Europe held a Summit of Heads of State and Government in Reykjavík.

It was our first Summit in 18 years, since the important Summit here in Warsaw in 2005.

In Reykjavík, all our 46 European leaders pledged to reverse the democratic backsliding –

To recommit to the values, and the rights and principles in the European Convention on Human Rights –

And, most importantly, to execute the final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, which is really the core of the Convention-system in Europe.

On top of this, leaders at our Summit agreed on concrete and specific steps –

Including a new set of 10 Principles of Democracy.

As well as additional and new measures to support Ukraine, including setting-up a Register of Damage caused by the Russian aggression.

The leaders in Europe also addressed some of the defining new challenges of our times –

Including climate change and Artificial Intelligence, as well as issues such as migrant smuggling.

As regards AI, this work has already resulted in a new international treaty – a Convention – on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law –

A treaty designed to help ensure that AI systems uphold our common standards during their lifecycles –

Rather than undermining them.

But before I discuss this landmark treaty in greater depth –

It is important to put it in its broader context –

The work that the Council of Europe has done on new technology over the course of the recent decades.

Certainly, when our Organisation was founded 75 years ago –

In the wake of the Second World War –

Our founding members could not have envisaged the manner or speed with which new technologies have emerged and changed our lives –

Nor the benefits that they have brought, or risks that they pose.

But the great advantage of the European Convention is that it is not a static set of rules for specific circumstances.

Rather the whole Convention-system has become a very dynamic system, with currently 225 treaties and conventions.

And even more important is the continuous development and dynamism of the caselaw of the European Court of Human Rights.

And here the Court in Strasbourg has said it very well: that it is a “living instrument” that must be applied to the present day.

On new technologies, it has done exactly that.

Let me just give you some recent examples of the case-law of the Strasbourg Court in this area.

The 2015 case of Delfi AS versus Estonia, confirmed that the applicant company could be held liable for offensive comments posted on a news portal –

And that this did not breach Article 10 of the European Convention –

The right to freedom of expression.

There have also been important cases relating to Article 8 –

The right to respect for private and family life.

These include, among others, the 2021 cases, Big Brother Watch versus the United Kingdom –

And Centrum för rättvisa versus Sweden –

Which confirmed that when it comes to the bulk interception of cross-border communications –

There must be safeguards against the abuse of that process –

Including “end to end” safeguards through supervision and review processes.

Another example, the 2023 judgment in Glukhin versus Russia also confirmed limits on the use of facial recognition technology to identify protestors –

Which should, if it is to be applied, meet : a “pressing social need…necessary in a democracy”.

More generally, it is interesting to note that the effect of this jurisprudence is that we see legal convergence across our member states –

As all national authorities must respect the case-law of the Court.

This is certainly true for the use of new technology, but also for all other issues on which the Court has adjudicated.

But at the same time – and I believe we all can agree with this – there must also be a tailored, multilateral approach, regulating new technology’s development and use –

So that society can benefit from innovation, without fearing it.

For this, the Council of Europe has developed a number of specific tools, addressing specific challenges.

We have worked on standards and policies to prevent digital advances enabling democratic backsliding –

With different sets of recommendations to all our 46 member states on areas such as the use of information technology in electoral processes, the risks of surveillance technology, and on countering the spread of online disinformation.

But we have also developed new international treaties to address some key developments in this area.

Let me give you three very concrete examples:

Cybercrime, data protection, and Artificial Intelligence.

On cybercrime, yes, the internet has given all of us new and unique ways of accessing knowledge –

Communicating with people that we would never otherwise have known –

And it has also given us economic opportunities, including ways out of poverty, that were previously unthinkable.

But it has also enabled new forms of crime and theft – including data and identity theft, extortion and victimisation.

This has become a huge problem for people, societies and governments alike, around the world.

Last year alone, there were more than 343 million cybercrime victims –

With data breaches up by 72% over the previous two years –

And phishing attacks – the most common form of cybercrime – are currently costing individuals and businesses more than 10.3 billion US dollars.

We all know and understand that tackling these types of transnational problems require transnational solutions.

And prime among these is the Council of Europe’s Budapest Convention on Cybercrime.

Adopted in 2001, the Budapest Convention remains the only legally binding instrument in its field.

It identifies concrete measures designed to help national authorities counter crime, protect victims and prosecute the perpetrators –

Its substantive criminal law provisions are designed to apply both to current and future technology –

And as an open convention, it has a global reach, ratified by countries not only in Europe, but around the world.

Today, it has 76 parties in total –

A number that continues to grow –

And our very active Cybercrime Programme Office in Bucharest, co-operates today with countries all over the world –

Helping them ensure that their laws are aligned with the Budapest Convention –

And that their criminal justice systems have the capacity to implement what is agreed in the convention.

In fact, over the years, the Council of Europe has so far provided technical assistance on these issues to a total of 130 countries -

And we are currently supporting Ukraine against cybercrime attacks that have come in the wake of Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022.

Building on the 2001 treaty, its First Additional Protocol criminalises acts of racism and xenophobia online –

While striking the right balance between fighting hate and respecting freedom of expression –

And its Second Additional Protocol –

Opened for signature just two years ago –

Addresses the challenges posed by obtaining
e-evidence between jurisdictions –

For all crimes, whether or not they are committed online.

This Protocol will no doubt make cross-border
co-operation on electronic evidence, both easier and more effective –

With a system of safeguards also in place –

Including a detailed article on the Protection of Personal Data –

In this way, the hand of justice extends even further into cyberspace and supports governments in dealing with cybercrime fairly and effectively.

On this topic, I very much welcome the additional international treaty against cybercrime that the UN General Assembly is expected to adopt soon.

I know that this treaty has taken inspiration from the Budapest Convention –

And I hope that the new UN treaty can play an important and complementary role to the Budapest Convention.

But what about data protection?

Again, the capacity to generate data, big data, and to share it, offers our societies real benefits.

From more accurate market research –

And better understanding of consumer preferences –

Through to important input for medical purposes and scientific research.

But again, the risks to our rights are real.

Last year the Council of Europe prepared a report on the use of Pegasus –

The spy software that can be installed on phones, and which apparently has been, on the mobiles of several European leaders, as well as journalists.

Once more, this is potential violation of our right to privacy.

But more than that, its chilling effect also threatens freedom of expression –

Along with the right to freedom of assembly –

Freedom of religion –

And even individuals’ physical and psychological integrity.

At the same time, data generation and collection continues to expand in both scope and use –

And this brings with it the increased risk of hacking and misuse.

Together with experts from all over Europe and elsewhere, the Council of Europe adopted two very relevant international treaties: Convention 108, and its recently modernised version, known as Convention 108+.

Both of these Conventions help us uphold human rights –

Making it clear that when governments use peoples’ data, they must show legitimacy, necessity and proportionality –

As well as a connection to a pressing social need.

Convention 108+ specifically addresses the challenges of a digitalised world –

Mapping out the route to free data transfer that also preserves human dignity and privacy.

Like the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, Conventions 108 and 108+ are the only international, multilateral and legally binding treaties on the protection of privacy and data.

And again, these are appreciated and seen as highly relevant not only to Europe, but also to countries throughout the world.

Data protection and the right to privacy are also relevant to the third unrelenting challenge that the global community faces today –

The rise of Artificial Intelligence.

Even now, it is hard to know its future impact and how far it will influence our lives and societies in the years and decades to come –

But that impact will no doubt be immense and bring changes that are astonishing.

We all hope for a future in which AI can continue to help us improve the detection, diagnosis and treatment for serious illnesses –

Help us speed up and simplify bureaucratic processes, improve our public services, and replace tedious and dangerous jobs –

But for all these potential benefits –

And many more –

There are equally a number of serious risks and challenges associated with it.

I think of the fact that in this bumper year for elections –

With over half of the world’s population voting –

Our elections and referendums are now marred by the threat and reality of AI-assisted election interference –

In terms of both electoral systems and disinformation and fake news that pollutes our minds, poisons public debate and have an impact how many vote.

This is a fundamental issue that has already had an impact and most likely will grow as a threat in the years to come, so I am sure that your deliberations on this subject tomorrow can only help us see better the risks and challenges it poses.

I also think of the many examples of banks, insurance companies and job application processes that can discriminate against applicants because AI systems can identify certain groups –

And often have an in-built bias against them –

Such as ethnic minorities and LGBTI people, for example.

And I also think of the way in which AI systems that assist in the administration of justice can also in fact jeopardise the right to a fair trial –

And challenge the fundamental principle of “equality of arms” in court proceedings.

Dear friends,

The good news is that specific instruments can be developed to deal with specific AI risks and problems –

And in the Council of Europe we have tried to do this.

But given the vast scope for the development of AI across our societies –

And the quantitative scale of its impact –

Where technology can breach the rights of millions at the single press of a button –

We also need a transversal approach to ensure that AI systems respect our rights continuously throughout the entire life cycle.

That is why European leaders at the Reykjavík Summit decided last year to continue the work on negotiating a new international treaty on Artificial Intelligence, safeguarding human rights, the rule of law and democratic principles.

And early this year we reached an agreement by all governments, including the United States, as well as the EU, on a new convention, that was opened for signature in September–

A new treaty providing a platform for increased co-operation on the design, development and use of AI systems.

This first-of-its kind international legal treaty that is designed to apply across all aspects of life where AI is in use –

And I would argue that its strength comes from the process from which it was created.

Our Committee on Artificial Intelligence, CAI, brought together experts from across our member states –

But not only our member states.

It also featured our Observer states - Canada, Japan, Mexico, the United States and the Holy See –

Plus, Israel –

The European Union, the OECD and UNESCO –

Along with further observers from outside Europe.

But when this treaty was negotiated, around the table also sat representatives from civil society, academia and last but not least - major internet industry actors.

Today it is open to signatures and ratifications by any country that shares our aims and values –

And I am pleased that the CAI’s Chair, Professor Hernandez Ramos, will speak in one of your panel discussions tomorrow –

Where I am sure that he will share further insights about both the process and the content of this very important and new Convention.

So far, 11 parties have signed it, including the US, the UK and the EU.

It requires 5 ratifications to bring it into force –

And I believe that this will happen very soon –

So that its positive impact can be felt –

Just like the Budapest Convention and Convention 108 and 108+ before it.

Dear friends,

The rise of new technologies is the story of our modern age –

And the Warsaw Dialogue for Democracy will certainly address in-depth many of the risks and benefits for democracy and human rights –

Let me finish with three examples which should help give us a positive perspective for the future.

First of all, the Istanbul Convention on combatting violence against women and domestic violence protects women online as well as offline –

As a matter of fact, new technologies can help us to implement the Istanbul Convention to identify and block harmful content before it reaches victims.

And alerts are often sent to support services in real time.

Secondly, while there are thousands of ways in which new technology is used to fund terrorism, enhance corruption and money laundering –

Technology is also used to help banks detect financial crime –

And the Council of Europe’s anti-money laundering body MONEYVAL –

Which is part of the global network led by Financial Action Task Force (FATF) –

Is now, among other things, looking at how countries can regulate and supervise the service providers of virtual currencies, such as Bitcoin –

To stop criminals laundering their illicit proceeds via this new payment method.

And third and last.

The Council of Europe is doing everything it can to support Ukraine.

As part of this, our Register of Damage for Ukraine is now fully operational –

Recording the suffering, loss and harm being inflicted by Russia on the ground in Ukraine –

And which is the first step towards an international compensation mechanism –

Which will be vital for accountability, together with the establishment of a new Special Tribunal for the crime of aggression –

And without which there will be no just and sustainable peace.

It is worth noting that the Register of Damage has been designed to accept submissions made via the excellent Ukrainian DIIA application –

Which allows citizens to upload digital documents from their smartphones –

Rather than needing to submit paper copies.

I believe this is a small but important example of the way in which new technology can help us also in the most extreme of circumstances during a war.

I will end here, and once again I express my gratitude to you prof. Nowak and the University of Warsaw, as the Warsaw Dialogue for Democracy, has for over a decade now, been able to set a focus on a number of crucial issues for Europe and the world community.

I look forward to your thoughts, comments and questions.

Thank you for your attention.