Online and technology-facilitated violence against women: The EDVAW Platform's contribution to human rights protection and monitoring

2.1 Explaining the EDVAW Platform

In 2016, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes, and consequences (the UN Special Rapporteur) acknowledged a significant gap at the international level in adopting a holistic and comprehensive approach to address violence against women, despite the existence of global norms and standards. This fragmentation was evident in the implementation of key global agendas and instruments, including the Beijing Platform for Action, ⁶ the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, ⁷ and other related treaties. The disconnect extended to global instruments and regional agendas on violence against women, along with the mechanisms responsible for monitoring their implementation. Despite the envisioned links between these instruments, the lack of coordination persisted. ⁸ Accordingly, the UN Special Rapporteur expressed a keen interest in enhancing collaboration with international and regional human rights mechanisms that play a key role in identifying and mitigating implementation gaps and government shortcomings. The goal was to expedite efforts to eliminate violence against women and tackle its underlying causes and far-reaching consequences. ⁹

Two years later, the UN Special Rapporteur led the establishment of the EDVAW Platform. This initiative brought together all the main international and regional independent expert mechanisms on violence against women and women's rights, recognising their key role in monitoring the state of women's rights, evaluating measures to combat violence against women, and identifying pressing issues, gaps, and shortcomings in the implementation of international standards and government commitments. The EDVAW Platform includes the UN Special Rapporteur, ¹⁰ the United Nations Working Group on discrimination against women and girls (the UN Working Group), ¹¹ the United Nations Committee on the elimination of discrimination against women (the CEDAW Committee), ¹² the Council of Europe Group of experts on action against violence against women and domestic violence (the GREVIO), ¹³ the Inter-American Commission on human rights rapporteur on the rights of women (the IACHR Rapporteur), ¹⁴ the Committee of experts of the follow-up mechanism to the Belém do Pará Convention (the MESECVI), ¹⁵ and the African Commission on human and people's rights special rapporteur on the rights of women (the AC Rapporteur). ¹⁶ Consequently, it lacks representation from the Asia Pacific and Middle East regions, where a pan-regional framework on women's rights is still lacking. ¹⁷

Since its creation, the EDVAW Platform has sought to collaboratively enhance the acceptance, incorporation, implementation, and updating of the current framework on discrimination and violence against women, ultimately creating a forum for collaboration and exchange. Consequently, it has engaged in consultations in various regions, hosted by regional mechanisms, working with civil society and stakeholders to identify and discuss common concerns and thematic priorities. ¹⁸ It has also participated in several events and expert meetings on discrimination and violence against women and published some statements on thematic priorities such as feminicide and workplace harassment. ¹⁹ Notably, the EDVAW Platform contributed to the 25-year review of the Beijing Platform for Action, advocating for its recognition and institutionalisation in the broader UN system. Some expert mechanisms are also involved in the Commission on the Status of Women deliberations, with the EDVAW Platform hosting a virtual briefing for civil society organisations (CSOs) in preparation for the 2023 session. Others participate voluntarily, presenting their work during side events. Financial constraints limit the participation of certain mechanisms. ²⁰

2.2 Prioritising the digital dimension of violence against women under the GREVIO's presidency

In 2021, the EDVAW Platform agreed on the adoption of a rotational chair system, ²¹ to bring fresh perspectives to its leadership, foster greater ownership among its members, and to facilitate the annual determination of priorities and focal topics. During its presidency (February 2022 – January 2023), GREVIO chose to emphasise the digital dimension of violence against women, aligning with its ongoing work in Europe. ²² Over recent years, GREVIO has consistently addressed this issue while monitoring the implementation of the Council of Europe Convention on combatting violence against women and domestic violence (the Istanbul Convention). This focus also led to the adoption of General Recommendation No. 1 in 2021, where GREVIO interpreted the relevance of the Istanbul Convention in addressing online and technology-facilitated violence, particularly in terms of prevention, protection, prosecution, and coordinated policies. ²³

Under GREVIO's presidency, the EDVAW Platform adopted its first thematic report in November 2022. ²⁴ This thematic report addresses the digital dimension of violence against women, aligning with the mandates of its members. It begins with a comprehensive overview of this gender-based abuse, coupled with some insights on terminology. The thematic report proceeds to explore the general approaches adopted by the EDVAW members, identifying key themes in their work and shedding light on both promising practices and challenges faced. Ultimately, it proposes some collective actions to address the escalating global issue of online and technology-facilitated violence against women. In the next section, we critically reflect on the EDVAW approach to address online and technology-facilitated violence against women as unfolded in this thematic report.

3.1 Terminology and definitions

The complicated and often controversial issue of definitions reveals a lack of agreement, resulting in terminological confusion over online and technology-facilitated violence. This complexity makes it difficult for victims to name their personal experience, for stakeholders to understand, compare and evaluate such abuse, as well as for States to provide an adequate response. This is also evidenced by the wide range of terms often used interchangeably and without precision, across the members of the EDVAW Platform.

In a 2018 report regarding online violence against women and girls from a human rights perspective, the UN Special Rapporteur explicitly defines this abuse as “any act of gender-based violence against women that is committed, assisted or aggravated in part or fully by the use of ICT, such as mobile phones and smartphones, the Internet, social media platforms or email, against a woman because she is a woman, or affects women disproportionately.” ²⁵ MESECVI draws on this definition in its work, simply adding its own non-exhaustive list of examples of online and technology-facilitated violence, as does the UN Working Group. ²⁶ Throughout the same document, however, the UN Special Rapporteur acknowledges and uses alternative terms such as ‘online violence against women,’ ‘cyberviolence,’ and ‘information and communications technology-facilitated violence’. ²⁷

Instead, GREVIO prefers the term ‘the digital dimension of violence against women,’ which it states covers “both online aspects (activities performed and data available on the internet, including internet intermediaries on the surface web as well as the dark web) and technology-facilitated (activities carried out with the use of technology and communication equipment, including hardware and software) harmful behaviour perpetrated against women and girls.” ²⁸ Despite using different terms, the scope is similar, which may explain why both the IACHR Rapporteur and the AC Rapporteur avoid specifically defining online and technology-facilitated violence against women and only acknowledge its significance, scale, nature, and impact. ²⁹

This definitional complexity reflects the lack of agreement within scholarship and policy. The discussion varies between the use of broader definitions, encompassing a wider range of activities, or seeking to draw the boundaries relatively tightly for better understanding and implementation. ³⁰ The dynamic nature of technology and social change, as highlighted by MESECVI, emphasise the need for flexible terminology, discouraging rigid definitions and online and offline dichotomies. ³¹ But, while this adaptability is crucial, this degree of uncertainty challenges understanding and evaluating the nature, scale, and significance of online and technology-facilitated violence. Also, it is likely to inhibit the effectiveness of legal, policy, and other measures at the national and regional level, given the borderless nature of the wrongdoing. ³²

In its thematic report, the EDVAW Platform acknowledges the absence of common terminology and the resulting confusion and negative consequences. ³³ Although it avoids adopting a specific term and recognises the need for dynamism to keep pace with technological innovation, the report introduces a four-fold classification based on the technology's role in channelling the abuse. First, specific technologies facilitate the commission of gender-based violence such as where domestic violence is carried out via the use of spyware and other tracking devices. Second, information and communication technologies (ICTs) can aggravate and amplify the harm victims experience, such as the non-consensual sharing of intimate images, where people generally feel continuous abuse arising from each new distribution or viewing. Third, there are technologies that give rise to new forms of abuse, as is the case with sexually explicit deepfakes. Fourth, the online environment is used to enable gender-based violence, including the use of social media to perpetuate online misogyny. ³⁴

3.2 Nature and scale

For the EDVAW Platform, the said complexities in defining online and technology-facilitated violence lead to challenges in gathering data on its prevalence, nature, and scale. This challenge is exacerbated by the fact that existing data is often not disaggregated by sex, age, or other relevant factors. Other contributing factors to this data gap include the omission of this form of violence in national statistics on violence against women, the absence of sex-disaggregated statistics on computer and cybercrimes, and the lack of official records documenting complaints about digital violence. ³⁵

Online and technology-facilitated violence - like other forms of violence against women - is gender-based, ³⁶ targeting women due to their gender or affecting them disproportionately. Although variations in study scope and methodology make it difficult to determine its exact prevalence, ³⁷ research consistently shows that it is alarmingly widespread. For example, according to a 2015 study by the United Nations Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development, almost three quarters of women have experienced some form of gender-based violence online, with almost two-thirds of the perpetrators being men. ³⁸ In 2020, a study by the Economist Intelligence Unit covering 45 countries reported that 85% women have experienced or witnessed online and technology-facilitated violence, ranging from 74% in Europe, 91% in Latin America and the Caribbean and 90% in Africa. ³⁹ In 2017, Amnesty International released a comparative study conducted across Europe, the United States and New Zealand which revealed that nearly a quarter of interviewed women had experienced online abuse and harassment motivated by gender, at least once in their life. ⁴⁰ In 2021, UN Women published a report on the Middle East where it emerged that 60% of women had suffered from online and technology-facilitated violence and had reported it in the past year. ⁴¹ In 2020, Pollicy, a Uganda-based feminist collective, conducted a survey on online violence against women in Ethiopia, Kenya, South Africa, Senegal, and Uganda revealing that 28% of women had experienced diverse forms of this abuse. ⁴²

In echoing its members’ views, the EDVAW Platform states that online and technology-facilitated violence is anything but a novelty, firmly grounded in the enduring social subordination of women. ⁴³ Accordingly, it should not be seen as separate from violence in the ‘real’ word but as part of an ‘online-offline continuum’, representing new forms of the same underlying violence. ⁴⁴ Additionally, online and technology-facilitated violence differently affects women and other individuals based on intersecting, societal and personal characteristics like gender and sexual orientation. ⁴⁵ In this regard, a recent study by Suzie Dunn et al., encompassing a worldwide geographical scope and nearly 18,500 respondents, demonstrated that a higher proportion of LGB* individuals had experienced any form of online harm (75,8%) compared to heterosexual individuals (57,2%). A similar result was also found when comparing the experience of online harm between the LGB* transgender and gender diverse people (87,7%), cis women (76,7%), and cis men (72,6%). ⁴⁶ Research has also revealed the ways in which race and ethnicity intersect with gender, fuelling abuse labelled ‘misogynoir’, and showing the heightened levels of abuse that black women experience online. In 2023, Glitch UK reported over 9,000 highly toxic posts targeting black women compared to their white counterparts. This result emerges from a dataset comprising nearly one million posts collected over six months. ⁴⁷ Furthermore, a growing body of research has documented the extensive violence women journalists experience online, with a global survey conducted by the UNESCO and the International Center for Journalists reporting that 73% out of its 625 respondents had suffered from one of its multiple forms. ⁴⁸ Similar patterns have also been observed in the experiences of women in politics. ⁴⁹

3.3 Harms and human rights violations

Online and technology-facilitated violence is a violation of human rights, ⁵⁰ a recognition underscored by the EDVAW Platform in its thematic report. ⁵¹ This acknowledgment aligns with the approach of the UN Human Rights Council and the UN General Assembly, both of which have already identified the potential negative impact of new technologies on the enjoyment of fundamental rights. Also, they have emphasised the importance of legal redress, asserting that “the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online.” ⁵² Similarly, research demonstrates the severe violation of the rights to human dignity, sexual autonomy, privacy, physical integrity and mental well-being, as well as freedoms of expression, association and movement that online and technology-facilitated violence gives rise to. ⁵³ This means that all forms of online and technology-facilitated violence involve a prima facie wrong, the impact of which might then be experienced differently, depending on the personal characteristics of each victim and the intersecting subordination they might experience.

Victims often experience a profound ‘social rupture’, dividing their lives into ‘before’ and ‘after’ the abuse. ⁵⁴ Psychologically, they report adverse impacts on their mental well-being, including depression, self-harm, panic attacks, and anxiety. ⁵⁵ They also fear for their safety in the offline world, ⁵⁶ proving the integrated nature of online and technology-facilitated violence. This continuous nature likewise impacts their professional and economic lives, leading to missed work or school, heavy expenses for legal and specialist support, and reduced online engagement. ⁵⁷ Also, victims report a profound sense of isolation due to victim-blaming responses and mistrust of family, friends, and colleagues. ⁵⁸ Overall, online and technology-facilitated violence inhibits women's full enjoyment of their fundamental rights, meaning that they cannot freely develop their personality and effectively participate in society on an equal footing with men. ⁵⁹

Cumulatively, these individual harms contribute to much broader social harms. Rather than being a means of social interaction, participation, and information, the online world becomes a place of social oppression and abuse that marginalises and silences women. ⁶⁰ The widespread online hostility to women commonly leads to their withdrawal and disengagement as a means of self-protection, thereby damaging wider societal debates and interactions, also widening an already existing digital gap. ⁶¹ Ultimately, online and technology-facilitated violence has significant financial consequences for all of society due to the loss of economic activity and health-related costs most victims incur. ⁶²

4.1 Demanding legal protection and liability

With human rights treaties and other soft law instruments already recommending the introduction of legislative, policy, and other measures to address gender-based violence, the EDVAW Platform welcomes any new or revised legal protections ensuring that online and technology-facilitated violence is criminalised at the national level. ⁶⁶ Also, it acknowledges that much of the current legislation is limited in scope and is poorly transposed into practice, especially when victim-blaming attitudes are so common amongst criminal justice systems. ⁶⁷ Accordingly, the EDVAW Platform endorses specific courses of action for preventive action and legal redress through criminal means. ⁶⁸

Generally, criminal law is considered an immediate and efficient response to gender-based violence, including online and technology-facilitated forms of abuse. Criminal law can convey the message that abusive conduct should have no place within society, while punishing people for their past conduct and restricting others’ fundamental rights and freedoms. ⁶⁹ However, the adoption of criminal provisions could prove ineffective or even counter-productive, if its formulation is not reflective of victims’ experiences. Rather than entrenching hierarchies between various forms of abuse at the risk of jeopardising legal protection, criminal law reform should acknowledge their overlapping and interrelated nature and prohibit them as a pattern of offending rather than as separate, specific, and isolated conduct.

In previous research, the common criminalisation of image-based sexual abuse in Europe illustrates this point clearly. ⁷⁰ National legislators often avoid outlawing the creation of an intimate image and/or the threat to distribute such material. ⁷¹ They also adopt terminology and constitutive elements of the crime that contribute to victim-blaming within and outside the courtroom. This is the case, for example, of the common use of the term ‘revenge pornography,’ ⁷² as well as the focus on specific offender motives. ⁷³ Besides, the introduction of new criminal provisions often happens without accompanying awareness-raising initiatives or specific training for judicial and enforcement personnel. ⁷⁴ Lastly, criminal law reforms often label online and technology-facilitated violence as a data protection violation, rather than considering its non-consensual nature and the infringement of the sexual autonomy of victims. ⁷⁵

In addition to criminal measures, civil law provides an alternative pathway for victims seeking redress, particularly for those unwilling or unable to engage with, or who have been inadequately supported by, the criminal justice system. In some instances, human rights treaties and their monitoring mechanisms recommend States adopt civil measures as part of their effort to tackle gender-based violence. This is the case with Article 29 of the Istanbul Convention, where State Parties are requested “to provide victims with adequate civil remedies against the perpetrators.” Similarly, Article 7 of the Convention of Belém do Parà demands State Parties “to include in their domestic legislation penal, civil, administrative, or any other type of provision that may be needed to prevent, punish and eradicate violence against women.” Accordingly, while certain members of the EDVAW Platform appear to entertain the prospect of civil redress, ⁷⁶ more action is required.

Although civil law is normally used to ensure the right to compensation for criminal offences, some scholars suggest framing gender-based violence as a civil rights violation or to explore the potential of tort law. ⁷⁷ In this way, it is argued, civil law justice could provide legal redress to all those victims who do not wish to engage with or have not been afforded relief through the criminal justice system. ⁷⁸ Furthermore, the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression refers to civil law to prohibit online and technology-facilitated violence that does not reach a threshold of real and imminent danger and cannot fall within the scope of criminal law. ⁷⁹

Beyond criminal and civil frameworks, a growing body of literature is exploring additional and innovative ways of seeking justice, including restorative justice where the aim is to bring together all the people who have been affected by the crime (that is, the victim, the offender, and society) to overcome it. ⁸⁰ Although still developing, restorative justice shows promise in addressing gender-based violence and overcoming the limitations of conventional criminal justice. ⁸¹ Great emphasis is placed in restorative justice approaches to the needs of the victim, helping them speak out and rebuilding their lives. ⁸² Additionally, restorative justice could assist victims in recovering from their harmful experience, despite challenges like cross-border issues and perpetrator identification. ⁸³ This may also encompass the organisation of the ‘victim-offender panels’, where the victim meets offenders who have committed similar crimes. ⁸⁴ These panels could provide victims with a sense of closure and empowerment, while encouraging offenders to understand the impact of their actions and take accountability. Such practices could complement existing legal frameworks by addressing the emotional and relational dimensions of justice that are often overlooked.

Against this background, the EDVAW Platform should continuously stress the necessity of a legal framework that accurately reflects victims’ experiences of online and technology-facilitated violence across criminal, civil, or other domains. While the EDVAW Platform already promotes a multi-agency strategy and private sector collaboration for implementing legal reforms, ⁸⁵ it should place stronger emphasis on engaging with CSOs and other stakeholders during the development and implementation of legal and policy reforms. This diverse and inclusive approach could ensure a comprehensive representation of actual and potential victims affected by intersecting forms of abuse. Grassroots initiatives, including the organizing efforts of women within digital spaces, are crucial to building resilience and remaining online. Just as women's organizations have been pivotal offline in addressing gender-based violence, their digital counterparts are playing a similarly important role in providing support to victims, especially where there are institutional gaps, and advocating for legal reform at the national and international levels. Recognising and fostering these bottom-up approaches, alongside top-down regulatory efforts, can contribute to more comprehensive, effective, and inclusive strategies for combating online and technology-facilitated violence against women.

4.2 Addressing the implementation gap beyond legal reform

As discussed above, the EDVAW Platform recognises the need for legal reform to address online and technology-facilitated violence. In response to EDVAW members’ recommendations, several national legislators have introduced or updated laws to ensure legal redress for digital abuse such as Nicaragua, Morocco, and Sweden. ⁸⁶ Sometimes, these legal reforms have been achieved on the basis of human rights instruments and mechanisms outside the EDVAW platform. The Beijing Platform of Action and Nepal are a case in point. ⁸⁷ However, while the right of women to be free from online harm is becoming an international human rights standard, its implementation remains inconsistent, with online and technology-facilitated violence still perpetuated and tolerated within many societies. In its thematic report, the EDVAW Platform acknowledges this shortcoming and proposes the following path forward.

For the EDVAW Platform, one of the most common reasons for the implementation gap lies in the failure of law enforcement to be reflective of and responsive to victims’ experiences. ⁸⁸ In the literature, it has been extensively reported that victim-blaming, stereotypes surrounding gender roles, and trivialisation of personal experiences are reproduced during criminal investigations, where “the ‘acceptability’ within some online environments of sexual violence is something which has long been suggested as a ‘get-out’ from discussions surrounding online interactions.” ⁸⁹ At the policy-making stage, there are concerns that legal reform could become mere political manifestos, potentially overlooking the root causes of women's social subordination. ⁹⁰ Despite this, criminal law remains a crucial area for addressing online and technology-facilitated violence. It is essential for policy-making to incorporate the voices of all victims, particularly those stigmatised and marginalised, and to consider non-punitive responses and alternative forms of redress. ⁹¹

Simultaneously, the EDVAW Platform recognises that the mere reliance on criminal law reform cannot effectively address the broader social issues at play. Specifically, it welcomes social awareness-raising actions or training aimed at criminal justice personnel. ⁹² This approach could tackle the current victim-blaming practices and guarantee a human rights-oriented approach to law enforcement. Furthermore, the EDVAW Platform supports national frameworks that provide victims with a range of general and specialised services, including helplines, counselling, and legal support. These services can also assist victims in tasks such as content removal, digital skill development, and the removal of invasive applications. ⁹³ This victim-sensitive approach could empower women to report and speak out about their abusive experiences. Looking forward, the EDVAW Platform could offer common training initiatives and consultancy services to ensure a coordinated international response.

Incidentally, the EDVAW Platform could actively raise awareness about the potential risks associated with criminal, policy, and other responses to addressing online and technology-facilitated violence, thereby preventing possible abuses of power. Notably, CitizenLab reports instances in Canada where narratives emphasising the vulnerability and victimhood of women have been frequently utilised to justify expanded government powers to de-anonymise, identify, track, and surveil online users. ⁹⁴ This approach has detrimental effects on other human rights, such as free speech and data protection. For this reason, the following subsection discusses the creation of new synergies between the EDVAW platform and human rights mechanisms other than the ones working on women's rights.

4.3 Creating new synergies with other human rights treaties and mechanisms

In anticipating and reinforcing collaboration among its members, the EDVAW Platform acknowledges the complex intersection of rights and freedoms in combating online and technology-facilitated violence against women. Given this complexity, new synergies with regional and international bodies beyond the EDVAW Platform are considered essential to advance comprehensive protection for women's rights in the digital realm. ⁹⁵

Despite the persistence of a digital gap, women are increasingly engaging in cyberspace, utilising various technologies to enhance their freedom of expression. Several ICTs provide platforms for new forms of citizenship, allowing women to shape, assert, and share their diverse identities. This active participation plays a key role in their knowledge development, empowerment, and equal involvement in society. ⁹⁶ Instead, online and technology-facilitated violence subordinates women, instilling fear, silence, and withdrawal. It also undermines their professional and social credibility, hindering active participation in public discourse. ⁹⁷ Given the significance and degree of harm it causes, online and technology-facilitated abuse could be equated to hate speech that is prohibited, under, for example, Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). ⁹⁸ In her 2021 report to the UN General Assembly, the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression argued:

“Expression is not free for many women or gender nonconforming people. Their voices are suppressed, controlled or punished explicitly by laws, policies and discriminatory practices and implicitly by social attitudes, cultural norms and patriarchal values. In its most extreme form, sexual and gender-based violence online and offline is used to chill or kill expression that is nonconformist or transgresses patriarchal and heteronormative societal or moral codes or norms.” ⁹⁹

Amongst potential synergies between the EDVAW platform and human rights mechanisms on freedom of expression, one could consider the Guidelines for monitoring and tackling online violence against female journalists of the OSCE Representative on freedom of the media. ¹⁰⁰ This collaborative dialogue could assist policy-makers in striking a balance among various socio-legal interests and prevent legislative processes from potentially becoming new tools of oppression and surveillance.

Beyond gender equality and freedom of expression, the EDVAW Platform emphasises the integration of women's rights into broader human rights mechanisms . ¹⁰¹ Given that online and technology-facilitated violence often entails the non-consensual processing of personal data, collaboration with the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy and similar human rights bodies is crucial. Although online privacy abuses predominantly impact women, ¹⁰² privacy and data protection rights have traditionally protected vulnerable groups against unwanted interference. ¹⁰³ Accordingly, it is essential for the EDVAW Platform to advocate for a dual focus in collaborating with privacy and data protection mechanisms: addressing the digital divide through the development of educational resources and training for women and stakeholders, ¹⁰⁴ and endorsing a gender-sensitive policy-making process that incorporates feminist approaches in technical and non-technical domains. ¹⁰⁵

Because online and technology-facilitated violence primarily occurs through privately-owned online platforms and searches engines, the EDVAW Platform also aims to promote greater engagement with international and regional mechanisms addressing risks to human rights in the business context. ¹⁰⁶ This includes partnering with the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights and the UN Special Representative on human rights and transnational corporations, especially to more effectively implement the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. ¹⁰⁷ These principles require the private sector to prevent, mitigate, and address human rights impacts linked to their operations, products, or services, even if they did not directly cause these impacts. ¹⁰⁸ Although the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights have been gender-mainstreamed, ¹⁰⁹ their soft-law nature limits their effectiveness. Thus, the EDVAW Platform might advocate for more effective State regulation of the private sector, an aspect that is discussed in the next sub-section.

4.4 Regulating and engaging with the private sector

In its thematic report, the EDVAW Platform recognises the key role of the private sector in addressing online and technology-facilitated violence. It emphasises the need for legal and policy reform aimed at the ICT sector, including risk assessments and harm reduction measures. ¹¹⁰ This approach aligns with current legislative and policy efforts to regulate business activities that could negatively affect fundamental rights and freedoms online.

In 2022, the European Union adopted Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 (also known as the Digital Services Act), which seeks to create a safer digital space where the fundamental rights of users are protected and to set a level playing field for businesses. One year later, the UK adopted the Online Safety Act 2023 imposing a ‘duty of care’ on the larger social media and search services, requiring identification of risks of harm and steps to mitigate such adverse impacts of online engagement. National legislators outside Europe are likewise introducing similar legal reforms. For instance, Singapore introduced its own Online Safety Act last year, primarily aimed at reducing exposure to harmful content online. ¹¹¹ Similarly, Indonesia, Vietnam, and Thailand are pursuing related measures. ¹¹² In Brazil, new legislative and executive proposals seek to enhance digital platforms’ content moderation. Meanwhile, Colombia and Argentina are focusing on strategic litigation and case-law to achieve similar goals. ¹¹³

Consistent with the EDVAW Platform's thematic report, some of these laws and drafts explicitly address online and technology-facilitated violence, recognising its gendered impact as a threat to fundamental rights. ¹¹⁴ This recognition aligns with the due diligence obligation outlined in Article 4(c) of the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women (1993) and the General Recommendation No. 35 of the CEDAW Committee. ¹¹⁵ However, these frameworks often fail to adopt an intersectional approach which is crucial for understanding how different aspects of a woman's identity contribute to unique forms of discrimination. ¹¹⁶ This failure could undermine their effectiveness and diverges from the EDVAW Platform's recommendations. ¹¹⁷

Ultimately, the EDVAW Platform recommends that States impose various measures on the private sector to prevent and mitigate online and technology-facilitated harms. These encompass risk assessments, content moderation, independent audits, and the creation of transparency reports, ¹¹⁸ aligning with legislative and policy trends worldwide. Moving forward, the EDVAW Platform should focus on detailing how these measures can be tailored to effectively combat online and technology-facilitated violence, ensuring their harmonisation across its geographical scope. For example, while the EDVAW Platform currently underscores the importance of ‘transparent’ and ‘easily accessible’ reporting mechanisms, ¹¹⁹ it could further elaborate on this by producing practical guidance on how online platforms and search engines should handle user reports, outline steps for removing non-consensual content, and ensure victims are informed about the reporting process and their rights. Furthermore, along with advocating for content moderation by individuals with specific training, ¹²⁰ the EDVAW Platform could also denounce the systemic issues surrounding the content moderation workforce. This critical task is often carried out by women, predominantly from low- to middle-income backgrounds in the Global South, who face considerable economic exploitation and psychological harm. ¹²¹

Lastly, the EDVAW Platform should emphasise that solutions to online and technology-facilitated violence must address underlying structural issues, including the pervasive gender biases embedded in technology design and operation. To advance this agenda, the EDVAW Platform could sponsor research initiatives, policy dialogues, and educational campaigns. With legal instruments like the Digital Services Act and the Online Safety Act introducing financial penalties for non-compliant online platforms and search engines, the EDVAW Platform could advocate for the strategic reinvestment of these fines to fund such initiatives.

4.5 Targeting domestic violence and anti-women rights’ rhetoric online

When outlining priorities for enhanced cooperation among its members, the EDVAW platform focuses on domestic violence and anti-women's rights rhetoric online.

Whilst technology is increasingly a part of social engagement and communication in dating and family life, it can be used to facilitate and gain control of a partner, instil fear and keep them in a permanent state of dependency. ¹²² The EDVAW Platform acknowledges this issue and urges its members to identify gaps and challenges at the national level in responding to the digital dimension of domestic violence. ¹²³ States should promote a more systematic understanding, recognising that the efficacy of legal reforms is contingent on broader social changes in attitudes. ¹²⁴

Ideally, the EDVAW Platform could push for reforms that prioritise victims’ experiences, enhance training for those involved in their support, and advocate for stricter regulations on the private sector. Furthermore, it could promote alternative technology designs to reduce abuse risks, such as incorporating activity logs in smart home devices and providing free, accessible stalkerware detection tools. ¹²⁵ Lastly, the EDVAW Platform should contribute to raising social awareness about the high-tech potential to facilitate access to help and services. This might involve supporting victims in remaining anonymous when seeking assistance and making it easier to document abusive conduct for evidentiary purposes. ¹²⁶

At the same time, the EDVAW Platform highlights the growing dissemination of anti-women's rights rhetoric online, contributing to a climate of collective violence motivated by gender. ¹²⁷ This phenomenon encompasses two distinct aspects: the rise of involuntary celibate (also known as incels) communities, where members express anger towards women and manipulate them to achieve short-term sexual goals, ¹²⁸ and a broader backlash against feminism seen in the ‘manosphere’, where misogynistic beliefs aim to silence women's and feminist voices. ¹²⁹ Overall, online anti-women's rights rhetoric challenges human rights and contributes to democratic erosion, increasingly appealing to socio-legal arguments such as the protection of parental rights against state interference and respect for national identity. ¹³⁰ In its thematic report, the EDVAW Platform advocates for coordinated action to address this transnational problem. ¹³¹ In this regard, a growing body of literature suggests that solely punitive measures like criminalisation and content removal may drive these communities underground, increasing isolation and extremism. ¹³² Instead, efforts should enhance digital media literacy, dismantle toxic masculinity, train frontline practitioners and caregivers, address mental health, and present alternative narratives to incels and potential offenders. ¹³³ Social awareness campaigns and interventions should engage men without demonising them. ¹³⁴

4.6 Anticipating new frontiers: The metaverse

At the end of its thematic report, the EDVAW Platform underscores the need for enhanced collaboration among its members to anticipate and address emerging frontiers of online and technology-facilitated violence against women. ¹³⁵ In doing so, it acknowledges the rapid pace of technological innovation, recognising that technology can continually channel new forms of gendered harm, and discusses the metaverse as an emerging landscape with the potential for such abuse. ¹³⁶ This emphasis is crucial, considering the limited engagement thus far by the members of the EDVAW Platform with the possibilities and challenges presented by the metaverse. ¹³⁷ Additionally, collective action against violence in the metaverse could stimulate greater global recognition of this emerging issue and foster proactive policy development, moving beyond the reactive approaches that currently dominate responses to online and technology-facilitated violence against women.

More specifically, the EDVAW Platform recognises the future convergence of physical and digital realities within the metaverse, where avatars interact. While meta-developers anticipate users shaping their own identities without constrains and joining a more diverse and inclusive society, ¹³⁸ the EDVAW Platform highlights emerging accounts of discrimination and violence against women in the metaverse. ¹³⁹ Studies suggest that individuals may carry trauma and harm from the metaverse into the offline world due to the association of the avatar with their body, ¹⁴⁰ revealing the intrusive nature of such incidents and discouraging women's participation in this emerging technology. Furthermore, the EDVAW Platform acknowledges that some meta-developers are implementing changes to the metaverse design to ensure the full enjoyment of fundamental rights, regardless of personal characteristics or avatars. While it expresses concern about the reactive rather than proactive nature of these changes, it recognises the knowledge and insights its members could contribute in this regard. ¹⁴¹ Additionally, given that the intersections between the metaverse, violence against women, and national legislation mostly remain under-explored, the EDVAW Platform could play a leading role in advancing legal protections. It could advocate for stronger legal safeguards at both the regional and national levels, while actively integrating the broad recommendations outlined in its thematic report.