Digital authoritarianism has become a powerful tool for repressive regimes, weaponizing technology to suppress dissent, surveil citizens, and manipulate public discourse. While international legal frameworks exist to protect fundamental freedoms, they remain insufficient against the rapid evolution of digital repression. States exploit surveillance tools, censorship mechanisms, and cyber tactics to entrench control, exposing the inadequacies of global legal safeguards.

International agreements enshrine rights frequently undermined by digital authoritarianism. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) affirms freedom of expression and access to information under Article 19,  yet regimes routinely impose internet shutdowns, block critical websites, and deploy state-sponsored disinformation to distort narratives. Similarly, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) guarantees the right to privacy under Article 17, a protection rendered hollow by invasive spyware and mass surveillance masquerading as national security measures. While the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime  provides a foundation for countering cyber threats, it lacks the provisions necessary to confront state-backed digital repression, allowing governments to operate with impunity.

In conflict zones, digital authoritarianism escalates instability and exacerbates human rights abuses. Governments and armed actors disregard International Humanitarian Law (IHL) principles such as distinction and proportionality, deploying mass surveillance and cyber offensives against activists, journalists, and civilians. Such tactics silence dissent, erode trust, and deepen societal divisions, using digital tools as instruments of coercion and fear.

As seen within these examples, despite the existence of these international frameworks there are  significant challenges hindering their enforcement. One major issue is the global nature of digital technologies. Surveillance and cyberattacks often transcend national borders, complicating jurisdictional accountability. Secondly, private companies  supplying spyware and other surveillance tools operate with minimal oversight, enabling authoritarian practices. Finally, multilateral institutions lack robust enforcement mechanisms, making it difficult to hold states or private actors accountable for their role in digital oppression.

To address these challenges, the international community must modernize legal frameworks to confront state-backed digital repression. In particular, strengthening the Budapest Convention to include specific provisions for addressing these issues is crucial. Additionally, stricter oversight of private entities involved in the surveillance industry is essential to ensure accountability. Multilateral institutions must also enhance their enforcement capabilities, enabling swift and effective responses to violations of digital rights.Without decisive reform, digital authoritarianism will continue to erode democratic values, human rights, and global stability. International law must adapt to the realities of the digital age, ensuring technology is used to empower people rather than oppress them. By safeguarding fundamental freedoms in the digital realm, the international community can reaffirm its commitment to justice, transparency, and accountability.