tom of the pyramid is hate speech that disseminates, propagates, or spreads hostility (and these are deemed to be different from those that vilify or glorify because they really can be just mere avenues of dissemination as opposed to an intent to condemn or to celebrate acts or persons. To avoid doubt, the States shall ensure that they do not use criminal law procedures to request intermediaries to take down defamatory statements or public criticism directed at politicians. Although intermediaries should remove defamatory content through civil procedural routes, defamation should not be criminal. Further, because they rely on digital technologies to inform the public or to form opinions, journalists and bloggers are to be protected against abuse or intimidation. Journalists and bloggers should not be regularly prosecuted, jailed, or fined for libel. In meeting the above obligations, States shall: — Rely on the existing cyber security and crime laws to set up multidisciplinary cybersecurity response teams and implement cybersecurity response strategies and plans to respond to old and emerging cybersecurity threats such as cybercrime and terrorism and distinguishing matters in the dual use of AI in the realm of security, defence, and critical national infrastructure. States shall not: — 4. THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY. States must respect, promote, and protect the right to privacy of their citizens and can only use existing criminal and national security laws to limit the request in response to legitimate national security considerations and the necessities of law enforcement — in well-defined cases and under specific circumstances. (a) use national security concerns as a blanket justification to excuse unwarranted privacy breaches, for example, unjustifiably increasing their legal and technical capabilities to closely monitor citizens and introducing measures that enable the collection of personal data through surveillance alongside invasive data retention modalities. They can only justify the breaches of the right to privacy when necessary to achieve a legitimate aim prescribed by the law and proportionate to the purpose pursued. (b) Unjustifiably collect and store vast amounts of personal and intimate information about an individual or group’s past or future actions. States should not subject journalists, lawyers, human rights defenders, and political activists to arbitrary and unlawful surveillance, either because they are being actively singled out for monitoring or simply because the Internet, often their primary means of communication, is subject to extensive monitoring. When considering whether interference is justified, states shall assess the interference not only in the privacy of family, home, and correspondence but also, in certain circumstances, citizens’ honour and reputation. (c) Perpetuate intentional suppression of legitimate dissent, curtailment of the right to free speech, and restriction of other citizens’ right to access information.