Open letter on the draft Rules of Procedure of the Conference of States Parties to the UN Cybercrime Convention

GPD, alongside Access Now, Fundacion Karisma, and Tanja Fachathaler (an independent expert), published an open letter expressing our shared concerns regarding the state of the draft Rules of Procedure of the Conference of State Parties which is intended to be the mechanism for oversight and monitoring of the UN Cybercrime Convention. We underline our concern that this proposed mechanism will provide only weak procedures for monitoring, oversight, accreditation and engagement by non-governmental actors, and we make recommendations to improve it.

Letter dated: 4th July 2025

We, the undersigned organisations, who have been active in the Ad Hoc Committee on Cybercrime (AHC) process since the onset, write to express our concerns regarding the state of the draft Rules of Procedure of the Conference of State Parties in terms of it weak procedures for monitoring, oversight, accreditation and engagement by non-governmental actors.

The modalities for the AHC have received praise for their predictability, transparency and inclusivity in the context of UN General Assembly processes, and are frequently cited as an example of positive precedent to shape future UN procedures. Moreover, given the broad-based and deep concern expressed by stakeholders from civil society, industry, academia and the technical community, it is especially important that the implementation of the UN Cybercrime Convention (UNCC) is supported by a robust and binding mechanism for reviewing the implementation of the Convention’s obligations, which facilitates open and inclusive non-governmental engagement.

In this open letter, we highlight positive elements of the modalities and procedures of the AHC which should be replicated as well as the limitations of the Rules of Procedure of the Conference of State Parties to the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC) and the UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) which should be avoided in the design of the Rules of Procedure of the Conference of State Parties to the UNCC.

However, given that we have not yet received a copy of the draft Rules of Procedure, we wish to reserve the opportunity to provide additional comments at a further stage in the negotiation process.

Participation of non-governmental observers

The Conference of State Parties to the UNTOC and UNCAC provide that objections can be made to the participation of a non-governmental organization, and that objections will be referred to the Conference for a decision (see, Rule 17, UNTOC and UNCAC Rules of Procedure). We are concerned that this approach subjects individual non-governmental entities to a high level of exposure. Experience from the UNTOC and UNCAC as well as other UN mechanisms has shown that this approach has resulted in arbitrary restrictions on the participation of non-governmental observers.* In the case of civil society and human rights organisations–who perform a vital function as watchdogs and scrutinise the compliance of member states with their obligations under international law, including international human rights law–the risk of discretionary application of vetoes is heightened.

We encourage member states to advocate for the inclusion of measures to mitigate the risk of arbitrary exclusions. For instance, member states may consider adopting the AHC’s approach to the accreditation of stakeholders and the use of list-based voting. At the AHC’s organizational meeting, member states adopted an inclusive list of stakeholders applying to participate in the AHC, enabling the full and equal participation of stakeholders in the process.**

In addition, we advise the inclusion of a “grandfather clause” to ensure that all stakeholders formally accredited to the AHC will have their accreditation carried over to the Conference of State Parties, as the mechanism designed to review, follow-up and ensure effective implementation of the Convention’s obligations.

Engagement and oversight of non-governmental observers

The Rules of Procedure should be designed to foster transparency and facilitate meaningful stakeholder input to support the follow-up, implementation and monitoring of the Convention. The Conference of State Parties to the UNTOC and UNCAC allow for non-governmental observers to attend plenary meetings, receive documents and make oral statements and/ or provide written reports on questions relating to their activities “upon invitation of the President” and “subject to approval of the Conference” (see, Rule 17, UNTOC and UNCAC Rules of Procedure).

In our view, these modalities for engagement are overly restrictive and would hinder the Conference of State Parties from fulfilling its functions of monitoring and overseeing adherence to the Convention’s provisions. As civil society and human rights organisations, many of us will continue to engage with the Conference of State Parties to ensure implementation of the Convention in adherence with its human rights and safeguards provisions. This requires us to be able to engage effectively, share evidence, testimony, and intervene during relevant agenda items. This form of oversight is vital to ensure that the Convention is not used by state parties to undermine or suppress human rights.

At a minimum, we recommend that the Rules of Procedure draws inspiration from paragraphs 1-4 of the “Modalities of the participation of multi-stakeholders in the Ad Hoc Committee to Elaborate a Comprehensive International Convention on Countering the use of Information and Communications Technologies for Criminal Purposes”. The AHC modalities enabled stakeholders to make oral interventions during plenary sessions and intersessional meetings and to submit written inputs after each stage of revision of the negotiation document. These methods helped in practice to facilitate interactive dialogue and exchange between member states and stakeholders, and should be accompanied by mandatory reporting by member states and assessment by non-governmental stakeholders to ensure that this mechanism can fulfil its functions of monitoring and overseeing adherence to the Convention’s provisions.

Transparency through the maintenance of a dedicated online platform

Another positive element of the AHC’s procedures was the maintenance by the Secretariat of a dedicated online platform, publishing submissions and oral interventions by all stakeholders including member states for each plenary session and intersessional meeting. This measure helped to ensure the transparency of the negotiation process and should be replicated in the procedures of the Conference of State Parties.

—

We hope that our recommendations contribute towards the enhancement of the modalities for stakeholder participation in the procedures of the Conference of State Parties to the UNCC by building on the positive precedent of the AHC and other UN mechanisms. We remain available to provide further expertise and assistance.

This open letter was prepared based on expertise from the following organisations and individual experts previously engaged in the AHC negotiations:

• Global Partners Digital (GPD)
• Fundación Karisma
• Access Now
• Tanja Fachathaler, epicenter.works – for digital rights
  

Footnotes:
* See, for instance: https://www.unodc.org/documents/treaties/UNCAC/COSP/session9/NGO/CAC-COSP-2021-NGO-3.pdf.|
** This is outlined in the “Report of the Ad Hoc Committee to Elaborate a Comprehensive International Convention on Countering the Use of Information and Communications Technologies for Criminal Purposes on its session on organizational matters held on 24 February 2022” (A/AC.291/6*).