The free flow of information, independence and lack of regulation are fundamental principles of the internet. With the development and expansion of the internet, countries began to feel the need for regulation, leading to various forms of online information restriction. Authors highlight the ongoing trend of states becoming main actors in internet governance. Literature in this field has mainly focused on the study of organisations that regulate access to information, while it does not address the process of information filtering by national governments in this context. Therefore, the thesis focuses specifically on the role of state actors. Internet governance is based on two narratives - internet freedom, which assumes that states should not interfere with or disrupt the flow of information across national borders, and internet sovereignty, which argues that states can legitimately restrict digital information flows to protect national security. The thesis analyses numerous reasons why states censor online information or even completely shut down access. Both authoritarian and democratic states use tools to restrict access to information online. The thesis looks for differences in the consequences of these restrictions. The analysis of information restriction tools in states advocating for internet freedom and those supporting internet sovereignty reveals similarities in their approaches to restricting information. Different reasons for restriction can lead to similar consequences, namely the failure to ensure human rights, particularly freedom of speech and the right to privacy.
|
