Technology-Facilitated Violence against Women and Girls: International and Regional Human Rights Standards, Gaps and Opportunities
New research from Lawyers for Justice in Libya and The Open University’s Centre for Protecting Women Online examines how international and regional human rights systems are responding to technology facilitated violence against women and girls and identifies important gaps and opportunities for stronger protection.
Technology facilitated violence against women and girls (TFVAWG) is a fast -growing serious human rights issue affecting women and girls globally. Digital tools, including social media, artificial intelligence (AI), tracking and monitoring technologies, enable new and rapidly evolving forms of abuse that outpace relevant legal frameworks. How international and regional human rights mechanisms respond to this challenge matters, as they can provide guidance to states to comply with their human rights obligations, and serve to equip advocates and litigators with the tools to better prevent and protect against TFVAWG.
A new report, Technology facilitated Violence against Women and Girls: International and regional rights standards, gaps and opportunities, examines how human rights law is responding to this rapidly evolving challenge.
Carried out by Lawyers for Justice in Libya (LFJL) and The Centre for Protecting Women Online (CPWO) and supported by the Open University’s Open Societal Challenges strategic funding, this research examines how key international and regional human rights mechanisms have approached TFVAWG as a human rights violation, including violence occurring online, through digital platforms and other technology mediated means. This also included examining specific state obligations to respect, protect and fulfil human rights in the context of TFVAWG, as well as responsibilities of corporate actors such as technology companies and social media platforms. The research examines standard setting instruments, including resolutions, general comments, concluding observations, thematic reports and related guidance.
One of the report’s central findings is that international and regional human rights mechanisms are increasingly recognising TFVAWG as more than a collection of isolated forms of online abuse. Instead, an emerging body of standards understands it as part of the wider continuum of gender-based violence against women and girls. This distinction matters as treating TFVAWG as a human rights issue places attention not only on individual perpetrators but also on the responsibilities of states, institutions and technology companies to prevent harm, protect those at risk and provide meaningful routes to justice and remedy.
The research also examines the obligations of states and the responsibilities of technology companies. Existing examined standards call on states to prevent violence, protect women and girls, investigate and prosecute abuse, provide remedies and reparation and collect evidence and data. They also highlight the need for appropriate laws, reporting mechanisms and institutional responses. At the same time, expectations of technology companies increasingly include human rights due diligence, safety and privacy by design, transparent reporting mechanism, content moderation and effective redress. However, the report finds these responsibilities remain unevenly developed. In many frameworks, expectations of technology companies are still vague, voluntary or lack clear mechanisms for enforcement.
Despite the growing recognition of TFVAWG, the research identifies significant gaps in the international human rights framework. Ath the time of the research, no UN treaty body had adopted a standalone General comment or General Recommendation specifically addressing TFVAWG and there was no Treaty body jurisprudence specifically on the issue. This leaves important questions about how existing human rights obligations should apply in individual cases relatively underdeveloped.
There is also no unified legal definition of TFAVWG. Different institutions use terms including “online violence”, “cyberviolence”, “ICT- related violence” and “technology facilitated gender-based violence”. The report argues that this fragmentation can weaken conceptual clarity and make effective implementation more difficult.
The cross-border nature of digital platforms creates another major difficulty as existing standards provide relatively little guidance on how states should respond when perpetrators, platforms and those experiencing harm are located in different jurisdictions.
The report identifies also opportunities for action, including developing clearer international guidance, bringing TFVAWG cases before human rights mechanisms, strengthening corporate accountability and supporting national implementation of existing strands.
The research will also contribute to a practical toolkit on TFVAWG for litigators and advocates, equipping those working in the field to use human rights mechanisms more effectively.
