UN Expert Warns Surveillance Is Reshaping Civic Freedom

The report describes this environment as a form of "digital enclosure" where the expectation of constant monitoring influences behaviour before any direct action by authorities even takes place.

A senior United Nations human rights expert has raised concerns that expanding surveillance systems are creating deep and lasting consequences for civic freedoms around the world, warning that activists, community groups and social movements are increasingly operating under the assumption that they are being watched at all times.

The warning comes from Gina Romero, the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, whose latest report examines the effects of modern surveillance technologies on civil society. The report argues that public discussion around surveillance has focused too heavily on individual privacy concerns while overlooking broader impacts on collective rights and democratic participation.

Romero says digital surveillance is no longer limited to monitoring individuals suspected of wrongdoing. In many countries, large-scale surveillance systems are becoming embedded in everyday life through national security measures, counterterrorism policies and expanded policing powers. As these systems grow, people involved in advocacy, protests and community organising are becoming more cautious about how they communicate, who they associate with and whether they participate in public activities at all.

The report describes this environment as a form of "digital enclosure" where the expectation of constant monitoring influences behaviour before any direct action by authorities even takes place. According to Romero, this atmosphere can weaken the social connections and trust that allow communities and movements to function effectively.

Human rights impacts extend far beyond privacy concerns

The report highlights a range of human rights consequences linked to surveillance practices, arguing that the issue reaches far beyond data collection and privacy violations. Rights related to freedom of expression, equality, political participation and protection from discrimination can all be affected when surveillance becomes widespread and intrusive.

Researchers found that governments frequently rely on narratives around crime prevention, national security and public safety to justify expanded surveillance powers. In some cases, activists, advocacy groups and protest movements are portrayed as potential threats, allowing authorities to introduce monitoring systems that might otherwise face stronger public scrutiny.

The report warns that this can reverse a fundamental democratic principle by placing pressure on individuals and organisations to prove they are not a security risk. Such conditions create a climate where lawful activism becomes associated with suspicion, even when groups are exercising internationally recognised rights.

The consequences are often felt inside organisations as much as outside them. Community groups and non-governmental organisations report spending increasing amounts of time and money on cybersecurity measures, legal advice and digital risk management. Resources that could have been directed toward public programmes, education campaigns or community services are instead diverted to protecting organisations from surveillance-related threats.

Trust between activists and supporters can also suffer. Recruitment becomes more difficult when people fear their involvement may be monitored or recorded. Volunteer participation may decline, and organisers often find it harder to build the strong personal relationships that social movements depend on to grow and succeed.

Facial recognition and digital repression raise fresh concerns

Particular attention is given to facial recognition technology and restrictions on anonymity in public spaces. The report argues that systems capable of identifying individuals in crowds can discourage participation in demonstrations, especially when combined with laws that prohibit face coverings during public gatherings.

For many people, the possibility of being identified, tracked or placed on watchlists creates uncertainty about the personal consequences of joining protests or political events. This can reduce public participation even when demonstrations are peaceful and lawful.

The report also examines the challenges faced by movements that increasingly organise online. Digital spaces have become important venues for activism, yet they are also vulnerable to cyberattacks, internet shutdowns and coordinated campaigns designed to discredit organisations or individuals. State-directed restrictions and online harassment can limit communication, weaken public engagement and disrupt organising efforts.

Beyond political and social effects, the report draws attention to the human cost of prolonged surveillance. Activists and civil society workers report experiencing emotional exhaustion, chronic stress, hypervigilance, burnout and symptoms associated with post-traumatic stress disorder. Living under constant uncertainty about monitoring and data collection can have serious consequences for mental wellbeing.

Romero also raises concerns about the role of private technology companies and telecommunications providers, arguing that some firms prioritise commercial interests over user protections. Information-sharing arrangements and technologies developed without adequate safeguards can contribute to wider surveillance ecosystems.

The report concludes with a call for governments and corporations to adopt stronger oversight mechanisms that assess the full impact of surveillance systems rather than examining privacy issues in isolation. According to Romero, protecting civic freedoms requires a broader understanding of how surveillance affects communities, social movements and the ability of people to come together in pursuit of shared goals.