The report “Social Media Regulation and the Rule of Law: Key Trends in Sri Lanka, India, Bangladesh”, which was launched recently in Colombo, examines the balance between state security, human rights, and the role of social media across these South Asian nations. This collaborative effort involves Konrad Adenauer Stiftung’s Rule of Law Programme Asia, LIRNEasia Sri Lanka, the Centre for Communication Governance (CCG) at the National Law University Delhi (NLUD) India, and the School of Law at BRAC University Bangladesh. The report provides several crucial observations and recommendations for policymakers and stakeholders alike: Key observations from the report: Bangladesh and India provide conditional liability exemptions for third-party content hosted by intermediaries, but recent legislative trends suggest a weakening of safe harbour protection. Across all three countries, centralisation of power with the executive is evident, resulting in regulatory frameworks lacking effective judicial and parliamentary oversight over blocking orders, internet suspensions, and user data requests. The centralisation of power with the executive has also fostered a lack of transparency and accountability in government actions, often justified by state security interests. 
The report “Social Media Regulation and the Rule of Law: Key Trends in Sri Lanka, India, Bangladesh”, which was launched recently in Colombo, examines the balance between state security, human rights, and the role of social media across these South Asian nations. This collaborative effort involves Konrad Adenauer Stiftung’s Rule of Law Programme Asia, LIRNEasia Sri Lanka, the Centre for Communication Governance (CCG) at the National Law University Delhi (NLUD) India, and the School of Law at BRAC University Bangladesh. The report provides several crucial observations and recommendations for policymakers and stakeholders alike: Key observations from the report: Bangladesh and India provide conditional liability exemptions for third-party content hosted by intermediaries, but recent legislative trends suggest a weakening of safe harbour protection. Across all three countries, centralisation of power with the executive is evident, resulting in regulatory frameworks lacking effective judicial and parliamentary oversight over blocking orders, internet suspensions, and user data requests. The centralisation of power with the executive has also fostered a lack of transparency and accountability in government actions, often justified by state security interests. 
Get ready to be immersed in the forefront of digital discourse as the 18th annual Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 2023 unfolds in Kyoto, Japan from 8 to 12 October, under the theme The Internet We Want – Empowering All People. LIRNEasia will host two sessions featuring experts from the Global South, along with LIRNEasia CEO, Helani Galpaya, Senior Research Manager, Gayani Hurulle, and Senior Researcher, Isuru Samaratunga. Helani will participate at two additional sessions. Here’s a sneak peek at the sessions; scroll down to find out how to register to attend in person or online. 1: Public-Private Data Partnerships in the Global South (Session #308) Zoom registration link (IGF 2023 Room 3) Session page This round table discussion will explore how the private sector is contributing to the data revolution toward achieving the SDGs, and the key policy and practice challenges faced by stakeholders in attempting to build data partnerships in this regard. 
The ‘Harnessing Data for Democratic Development in South and Southeast Asia’ project currently being implemented by LIRNEasia is focused on data policy ecosystems in South and Southeast Asia taking into account both formal and informal policy and practice. The project also aims to expend the community of practice of Asian Data for Development practitioners and enhance the capacity of actors to participate in policy making processes and evidence-based policy influence related to data. Data governance ecosystems are made up of policies, laws, practices, behaviours and technologies that govern data. Ideally, a data governance system protects rights, enables innovation, improves transparency, and ultimately brings about democratic, inclusive governance. There are many existing and new such policies, laws and practices and tensions can arise when balancing conflicting needs.
Here is what I worked up as an opening statement for the IGF 2015 Main Session: Human Rights, Access and Internet Governance Roundtable on Day 4: 13 November, 11:00-13:00, at the Main Meeting Hall I have been engaged in the provision of access, first to voice telephony and then to Internet, over the past two decades. Compared to expansion of access to other infrastructure services such as electricity and transportation, the ICT efforts have been extremely successful. In my work in government, as well as in our work in research and policy advocacy, we have tried to be mindful of the legal obligations set out in our laws (as well as in international treaty instruments our government is party to). Article 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which requires government to act without discrimination and Article 25(3) on equal access to public services were among the most relevant in terms of access policies and implementation. Active government support for access is associated with a positive-rights approach.
On Friday, September 7, 2007, the Ministry of Disaster Management and Human Rights (MDMHR), with the support of LIRNEasia, held a meeting on “The Role of Telecom Operators and Broadcasters in a National Public Warning System” with a six of the eight major telecom operators, as well as several disaster management-related government agencies (NBRO, Irrigation Dept., Meteorology Dept., CCP, etc.), UNDP, and a few technical institutes. Mr.