This week, more than twenty civil society organizations released a joint contribution highlighting important concerns and recommendations for the Tenth Summit of the Americas, which will focus on building “a secure, sustainable, and prosperous hemisphere.” Since 1994, the Summit of the Americas has gathered the Heads of State and Government of the hemisphere to discuss shared policy issues and commit to concerted action at the national and regional levels. Read the full document below.

I. Introduction

The undersigned organizations are submitting inputs to the process leading up to the Tenth Summit of the Americas, to be held in December 2025 in the Dominican Republic. This joint contribution reflects a set of concerns related to the intersection between technology and human rights. It is addressed to the States of the Americas that are part of the Summit.

The objective of the Tenth Summit is to bring together the different countries of the region to agree on commitments and actions that will position the Americas as a safe, sustainable, and prosperous hemisphere. The concept note begins with the guarantee of human security in multiple dimensions, focusing on four main thematic areas: citizen security, food security, energy security, and water security. Although digital technologies are not directly mentioned, the potential and challenges related to their development and use are part of state policies and actions, and therefore, transversal to what is proposed in the concept paper.

Our contribution aims to address some of the most relevant aspects in this regard, highlighting key points that deserve the attention of the States and offering relevant and specific recommendations.

We hope that these aspects can be considered in the Tenth Summit process, and appreciate the opportunity to learn and participate.

II. Technology Matters Related to the Concept Paper

1. Enhancing the Digital Civic Space: Infrastructure and Connectivity, Digital Inclusion, Citizen Participation, and Transparency

      a. Context and Challenges

The digital civic space has become a crucial dimension for exercising rights, promoting citizen participation, and fostering democratic governance. However, in many countries of the region, there are still structural challenges that limit meaningful access to digital technologies. These include the infrastructure gap, inequality in connectivity, the absence of inclusive policies, and a lack of transparency in the State’s use of technology. These challenges prevent broad sectors of the population from fully exercising their rights in digital spaces.

Human security, which seeks the dignity and well-being of each individual, and citizen security, focused on peaceful coexistence, are inextricably linked to the digital civic space in the 21st century. However, this space cannot develop without a solid foundation of digital infrastructure and meaningful connectivity, as well as true digital inclusion, citizen participation, and transparency in the formulation of public policies. These three elements are interdependent and crucial to building safer and more resilient societies.

      b. Infrastructure and Connectivity

A robust digital infrastructure and universal, meaningful connectivity are prerequisites for the socioeconomic development of our societies.1 Without them, a significant part of the population is excluded from vital information and opportunities (e.g., education, employment, culture), essential services, and channels for citizen participation. This generates conditions that harm citizen security.

Hence, the importance of taking active steps to reduce the various and persistent digital divides2 lies in improving Internet access and affordability, facilitating multilingual knowledge and content, and developing digital skills. Ensuring that people have universal and meaningful access to the network enables them to access education, culture, health, employment, and information —key pillars of human security.

RECOMMENDATIONS

  • Promote policies that ensure secure and affordable broadband Internet for all people, recognizing access to the web as an essential right for full participation in society and the digital economy. This includes diversifying access through locally driven efforts (e.g., community networks), innovative ways of financing connectivity (e.g., mixed funding mechanisms), and the drive towards true multilingualism on the Internet.
  • Promote interoperability to avoid dependence on private providers, making connectivity more resilient and accessible. This includes paying greater attention to open-source technology solutions, which can help reduce costs and enable communities to audit and adapt technology to their specific needs, fostering local innovation and transparency in network management.
  • Ensure that connectivity policies are subject to regular monitoring and evaluation mechanisms through participatory processes that include communities, civil society organizations, and technical stakeholders. These mechanisms should ensure transparency, accountability, and the incorporation of lessons learned to facilitate continuous improvement.

     c. Digital Inclusion

Digital inclusion implies that each person has the skills and knowledge to use and appropriate technology safely, critically, and productively according to their interests and those of their communities. By equipping people with digital skills, their capacities for self-protection, personal development, and informed participation in public life are strengthened, improving their overall well-being and that of society.3

However, recognizing that the gender gap is a significant obstacle to this full inclusion is crucial. Not only does it limit the online participation of individuals on the basis of gender, but it also makes them more vulnerable to technology-facilitated violence (e.g., cyberbullying, image-based sexual abuse, etc.) and multiple exclusions resulting from the digital divide, in a context of digital transformation and digitization of public services.4 Existing gender inequalities in the offline world are replicated and amplified in online spaces, which is why gender-responsive digital inclusion programs are urgently needed.

All the aforementioned elements do not operate in silos. Better infrastructure enables greater connectivity, facilitating digital inclusion. More inclusive digital environments allow a greater number of people to participate in public policymaking processes. This participation requires further transparency, which in turn builds trust and strengthens citizen security. To this end, protection is needed for people who exercise their rights by participating in public life. Together, these pillars build a digital civic space that is not only a reflection of solid democracies but also an indispensable tool for achieving comprehensive and lasting human and citizen security in the region.

RECOMMENDATION

  • Implement media and information literacy programs for all ages, with a particular emphasis on developing critical thinking skills. The goal is for people to not only know how to use technology effectively but also to understand their online rights and make informed decisions to protect themselves and their communities, thereby strengthening the social fabric.

2. Citizen Security and Surveillance Technology

        a. Context and Challenges

Over the last decade, States in the region have expanded their surveillance capabilities, ostensibly to ensure public security, which has been reflected in the growing adoption of increasingly intrusive technologies and practices, often without adequate transparency or regulatory frameworks that guarantee oversight and accountability.5

The lack of safeguards in the application of these types of measures poses a risk to the full enjoyment of human rights. This is particularly true for the right to privacy, which is considered an enabler for the exercise of other fundamental rights6 and is closely linked to freedom of expression.7 The latter can only be fully exercised when there’s a “private sphere, free from arbitrary state interference”.8 In turn, the persecution of critical discourse often leads to the implementation of measures that erode the right to free expression and privacy.

Closed-Circuit Television of public spaces and the incorporation of biometric identification technologies, open source intelligence (OSINT),9 the acquisition and use of spyware, the interception of communications, and other forms of control used to monitor, intimidate or silence journalists, human rights defenders and other forms of dissent, threaten privacy, discourage the free exchange of ideas and weaken democratic participation, as noted by the Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression (RELE, in Spanish) of the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (IACHR).10

These practices, when not adequately regulated and overseen, may constitute direct violations of the standards of the Inter-American Human Rights System. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) has affirmed that covert surveillance, interception of communications, or mass collection of personal data constitutes a serious interference with fundamental rights protected by the American Convention on Human Rights. These measures must strictly comply with the principle of legality, pursue legitimate purposes, be necessary and proportional, and have adequate safeguards, such as prior judicial authorization, independent institutional control, and effective legal remedies.11

The case Members of the Jose Alvear Restrepo Lawyers Collective (CAJAR) v. Colombia constitutes a crucial precedent in the region: the IACtHR established that States must prevent illegal surveillance and ensure the protection of personal data, guaranteeing informational self-determination, access to information, and effective oversight and accountability mechanisms.12

The Summit process must take special account of the standards and guarantees developed within the Inter-American Human Rights System. The IACHR has emphasized that citizen security is a public policy concept.13 In this sense, the design, implementation, and evaluation of citizen security policies should be governed by international human rights principles, “especially the principles of participation, accountability, and non-discrimination.”14 The Commission has pointed out the lack of effective accountability mechanisms that ensure transparent management and favor different forms of control by the citizenry as one of the most significant obstacles of the States’ due compliance with the rights committed to in the matter of citizen security.15 

In this context, prior judicial authorization, duly reasoned, is essential for carrying out various tech surveillance actions. The American Convention on Human Rights16 also guarantees informational self-determination and requires that this right be guaranteed in the context of state surveillance. Any restrictions on this right must be narrowly conceived, duly reasoned, and time-limited.

RECOMMENDATIONS

  • As the General Assembly and the United Nations Human Rights Council have noted, States must refrain from unlawful and arbitrary surveillance practices and must guarantee the exercise of the right to freedom of expression.17
  • Strengthen citizen security in the digital world through the proportional use and enforcement of strict legal frameworks, avoiding the concentrated and centralized use of criminal law as an instrument to counter any potential threats that may undermine online safety. The measures adopted to achieve this objective must comply with the Inter-American Human Rights System’s three-part test of legality, necessity, and proportionality.
  • Refrain from developing, acquiring, or deploying surveillance technologies and automated systems that do not ensure full respect for human rights, as defined under international human rights standards. This includes considering measures such as moratoriums or bans when technologies imply substantial and non-mitigable risks to fundamental rights, in line with what has been stated by the United Nations General Assembly.18 
  • Ensure that all citizen security public policies, as well as intelligence or criminal prosecution activities, are developed in compliance with the principles of participation, accountability, and non-discrimination. States must have institutional structures and resources that guarantee democratic and rights-based management, including independent oversight mechanisms with powers and technical autonomy.
  • Incorporate safeguards such as prior, duly reasoned judicial authorization, the existence of effective remedies, and compliance with data protection and informational self-determination also in public security activities, as guaranteed by the American Convention on Human Rights.

      b. Citizen Participation and Transparency

Active citizen participation in the design and monitoring of public security policies, including those involving digital technologies, makes them more legitimate, relevant, and effective.19 When solutions emerge from dialogue with the people, it reduces distrust in institutions and ensures that policies address the real concerns of communities and individuals.

Transparency is essential for safeguarding privacy and freedom of expression, which are core human rights. It is crucial that the acquisition, deployment, and use of technology by governments for security purposes, such as surveillance tools, be transparent and adhere to human rights principles. Lack of transparency can cause mistrust, fears of arbitrariness, and potential abuse of power. When there is transparency, individuals and communities can monitor and demand accountability, strengthening the rule of law and individual freedoms.

RECOMMENDATIONS

  • Design accessible and transparent strategies and mechanisms for public consultation, submission of proposals, and public monitoring of security policies, including those involving the implementation of the State's technological capabilities. Transparency on the acquisition, deployment, and use of technologies by the State should be the norm, not the exception.
  • Create and/or strengthen independent oversight bodies with robust powers and structures that are compatible with their competencies, to ensure effective control, compliance with the right of access to information, and accountability to the public.

3. State Digitalization and Human Rights-Based Innovation

      a. Context and Challenges

In recent years, Latin American countries have accelerated the digitization of their public sector. This process has been driven primarily by a commitment to increase efficiency, modernize public procedures and services, and enhance transparency. The Ninth Summit of the Americas, held in 2022, adopted commitments in this respect in the framework of a Regional Program for Digital Transformation.20

However, recent research has identified that fully or partially automated systems and technologies based on artificial intelligence (AI) have been implemented in key public sectors without adequate diagnostics to support them, nor proper evaluation mechanisms.21 In many cases, the commitments of legality, necessity, and proportionality provided for in international human rights standards and reinforced by the UN Human Rights Council have also not been observed.22

The speed of technological deployment has not been accompanied by measures to strengthen guarantees and safeguards to prevent and respond to possible abuses. On the one hand, there are still countries with outdated or inadequate regulatory frameworks for public transparency and data protection; on the other hand, existing rules are often not adequately enforced. This scenario has enabled the development of initiatives that impact the fundamental rights, especially of the most vulnerable sectors of the population.

This is illustrated by systems such as SINE in Brazil, Alerta Niñez in Chile, and PretorIA in Colombia.23 They have been used to prioritize social interventions, detect “risks” in families, or even to support judicial decisions, without adequate control or accountability mechanisms. In other words, these technologies determine access to public policies or social services without establishing mechanisms for democratic verification or providing an appeal process for those affected.

This technological progress occurs within a regional context of high inequality, with low participation by Latin American countries in the design of these technologies, as well as a strong technological dependency.24 In many cases, States adopt systems that they do not fully control or understand, increasing their institutional vulnerability and weakening the region’s technological sovereignty.25 Additionally, decisions are made without established mechanisms for consultation or public dialogue, which increases the risks of exclusion, discrimination, and abuse.

This becomes even more relevant given the risk that investments in digitalization and AI will divert essential resources intended for critical social programs, especially in contexts of fiscal adjustments or budget cuts, as the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health has warned.26

RECOMMENDATION

  • Adopt regulatory frameworks that ensure that all public sector digitalization processes are grounded on human rights principles, applying the criteria of legality, necessity, and proportionality from their design.27

    b. Participation and Transparency

The public sector’s adoption of digital and/or automated systems has not been accompanied by or preceded by citizen participation. There are no institutional frameworks that guarantee an effective and sustained citizen participation in public sector technological decisions. In turn, initiatives for voluntary public consultation in decision-making processes have proven insufficient to ensure meaningful participation, particularly for those potentially most affected.28 

Nor have structured consultation mechanisms or public evaluation processes been established for the tools used.29 Government agencies typically define digital policies without prior consultation with social actors or the sectors responsible for their implementation in the territories.30

Transparency is another critical issue. Many technology decisions in the public sector, including vendor agreements, platform selection, and algorithm design, are made without access to relevant information. Contracts rarely include obligations for disclosure, external auditing, or publication of source code; nor do they involve open source technologies, which impedes citizen oversight.31 

Even when access to information regulations exist, barriers include a lack of response to critical issues related to the systems and technologies adopted, incomplete responses to requests for information, refusal to provide answers, delivery of outdated data, allegations of secrecy, and the absence of proactive transparency measures. In addition, no common standards have been established to ensure that information on automated systems are clear and relevant to the individuals concerned. In the absence of technical and administrative transparency, the digitization of the State becomes an opaque process, difficult to control and far from democratic principles.

RECOMMENDATIONS

  • Guarantee the meaningful participation of civil society in decision-making and monitoring the implementation of technologies in the public sector, including accessible and representative mechanisms for indigenous peoples, rural communities, women, people with disabilities, youth, and other historically marginalized sectors, respecting their right to prior consultation when appropriate.
  • Require human rights impact assessments to be conducted before implementing automated decision-making systems in the public sector. These assessments should be meaningfully participatory, interdisciplinary, and publicly accessible, in line with the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence.32
  • Include clauses on transparency, independent auditing, and access to source code or its equivalent in any procurement of technological solutions implemented in the public sector.
  • Promote the development of open-source technology solutions to increase transparency and enable civil society and individuals to audit and understand how these tools work, thereby fostering the skills necessary to interrogate the use of technology.
  • Strengthen the entities responsible for overseeing and implementing access to information regulations, as well as implementing active transparency measures related to the acquisition, deployment, and use of technologies in the public sector, particularly for the delivery of essential public services.33 

    c. Data Protection and Cybersecurity

One of the most critical aspects of the government's digitalization is the handling of personal data. The growing collection and processing of sensitive information by public agencies requires specific regulations, which, in most Latin American countries, are still nonexistent or insufficient. Even where legal frameworks exist, they often face weak or ineffective enforcement, underscoring the need not only for new regulations but also for strengthening compliance and oversight mechanisms.

In many countries of the region, there are no updated data protection laws, or those that do exist have significant gaps. One of the main weaknesses is the existence of broad exceptions that permit the use of personal data in the context of public policies, even for purposes other than those for which it was collected. This practice erodes the principle of purpose and exposes the population to the misuse of their data.

Added to this is the lack of independence of the data protection authorities when they exist. In several cases, oversight bodies lack the technical autonomy, resources, or tools necessary to address abuses effectively.

Regarding cybersecurity, regional assessments reveal that many countries lack robust strategies or protocols for responding to cyber incidents. Some still lack national cybersecurity plans.34 Leaks of public databases, improper access to state systems, and illegal commercialization of citizen information are frequent problems.35 Additionally, there are no clear protocols for notifying individuals affected by data breaches or unauthorized access, which limits their ability to defend themselves and seek redress.

In the context of increasing digitization, this lack of institutional response exacerbates the exposure of at-risk groups. Gender gaps are also a constant: digital protection strategies rarely contemplate specific measures for women, individuals of diverse sexual orientation and gender identity, or communities facing higher levels of surveillance or structural violence.36

RECOMMENDATIONS

  • Strengthen the effective enforcement of existing legal obligations in the areas of human rights, data protection, and cybersecurity, including the creation or strengthening of oversight and control entities.
  • Avoid the secondary use of personal data collected in public sector services to train AI systems without obtaining explicit, free, and informed consent, while upholding the principles of necessity and proportionality.

III. Recommendations for Regional Cooperation

Regional cooperation on human rights and technology is becoming increasingly relevant in addressing everyday challenges and promoting shared solutions. Within the Summit of the Americas process, we identify key areas where States can coordinate efforts, align guiding principles and regulatory frameworks, and strengthen capacities, to ensure that the digital transformation is based on human rights, inclusion, and social justice. The following recommendations aim to contribute to this goal.

     1. Rights-based policy frameworks and institutional cooperation

  • Ground the creation of the Hemispheric Platform for Citizen and Community Security in a strong mandate to respect, promote, and protect human rights. This implies that the exchange of information and coordination of efforts operate under strict principles of legality, necessity, proportionality, and transparency, with the implementation of robust oversight and accountability mechanisms that effectively safeguard individuals and ensure multi-stakeholder participation.
  • Develop and implement regional cooperation standards and mechanisms governing democratic data governance and the ethical use of technologies. These instruments should ensure that the collection, processing, and use of data in the region are carried out with respect to the right to privacy and non-discrimination, under robust data protection legislation, in compliance with its general principles, the guarantee of free and informed consent, and ARCO rights, as well as effective independent oversight.37
  • Introduce a temporary moratorium in the Americas on investment by development banks and international financing mechanisms in the implementation of digital surveillance systems, practices, and technologies. The moratorium should be maintained until a comprehensive review of existing evidence is conducted and published. Following such a review, procurement frameworks for future collaborations should focus on ensuring compliance with human rights obligations, paying particular attention to situations where human rights protections are weak or where there is an increased risk of exclusion.

    2. Transparency, Assessment, and Accountability in the Use of Technology in the Public Sector

  • Evaluate the existing evidence in the region regarding the risk of human rights violations associated with the deployment of technologies with surveillance capabilities. Based on this assessment, activities that increase this risk should cease. Advice, diagnoses, investments, and technical support from interstate and international organizations must have a solid empirical basis, particularly regarding the impact of these technologies on human rights. This assessment should actively incorporate contributions from civil society, academia, and the technical communities to enrich the evaluation from diverse and expert perspectives.
  • Exchange best practices on transparency and accountability mechanisms in the acquisition, deployment, and use of surveillance technologies, to guarantee access to public information.
  • Call for greater transparency in the activities of international organizations and surveillance technology companies. This involves the publication of public contracts and human rights impact assessments per the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and technical audits, along with the implementation of accountability mechanisms that allow civil society and other stakeholders to access information and demand accountability, as well as the establishment of sanctions to ensure that only systems that fully respect human rights are implemented.
  • Increase funding and resources for baseline studies, regional contextual analyses, and cost-benefit assessments, as well as independent human rights-based evaluations. This includes the allocation of funds and resources to carry out human rights-based assessments, conducted by independent experts/entities and publicly available, at all stages of the life cycle of these technologies.
  • Require international cooperation for the development and deployment of AI systems to be subject to prior human rights and environmental impact assessments and to meet strict criteria of transparency and accountability.

    3. Inclusive Dialogue and Ethical Technology Development

  • Design and implement multistakeholder dialogue platforms to reach consensus and adopt best practices that strengthen a public policy and regulatory framework that protects the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, association, and political participation, both online and offline. This framework should prevent undue restrictions, arbitrary surveillance, or censorship, especially in contexts of social protest or citizen mobilization.
  • Foster multistakeholder dialogues on cybersecurity, data protection, and the establishment of judicial oversight to prevent the illegitimate use of surveillance technologies. These dialogues must include the active and meaningful participation of affected or potentially affected communities, including those that have been historically excluded. Sufficient time and resources must also be allocated to ensure that meaningful and productive discussions occur.
  • Design and implement funding programs and public policies that condition support for AI research, design, and development on the demonstrable integration of diversity, equity, and inclusion criteria, prioritizing an intersectional gender perspective. This should include requiring diverse development teams, evaluating algorithmic biases through independent audits, and certifying AI systems that meet equity standards, as well as establishing effective incentives that actively promote the incorporation of these criteria from the earliest stages of the technological life cycle.

The following organizations are signatories to this document:

ARTICLE 19, Oficina para México y Centroamérica

CELE - Centro de Estudios en Libertad de Expresión y Acceso a la Información

Derechos Digitales

Electronic Frontier Foundation

Wikimedia Foundation

Usuarios Digitales

Fundación InternetBolivia.org

Sursiendo, Comunicación y Cultura Digital

Transparencia Electoral

IPANDETEC

Cooperativa Tierra Común

Digital Technology for Democracy Lab, University of Virginia

TEDIC

Conectas Direitos Humanos

Cooperativa Sula Batsú

Fundación Escuela Latinoamericana de Redes, “EsLaRed”

ANDI - Comunicação e Direitos

Observatorio de Derechos Informático Argentino (O.D.I.A.)

Taller de Comunicación Mujer

R3D: Red en Defensa de los Derechos Digitales

ONG Amaranta

Centro LATAM Digital

Fundación Huaira

Red Feminista de Investigación en Inteligencia Artificial

Consorcio Al Sur

MINGAnet, por el cuidado de la Paz y la Vida

PDF icon Aportación Conjunta Décima Cumbre de las Américas