<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Friday 18 October 2013 08:48 PM,
Chinmayi Arun wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CACu5V_tVqZn4GcFF9AxBZC4OwBgYrWPLy3HY5cmi_TYabFsPCQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 6:38 PM,
parminder <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="im"> <br>
<div>On Friday 18 October 2013 08:45 AM, Chinmayi Arun
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px
0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">However,
later in your email you say that such an
enforcement mechanism is also of no use, because
India would not submit to it.... Well, isnt that
a somewhat fatalistic attitude to take towards
future of global governance of the Internet.
What other option there is to try to get such a
enforcement mechanism, and try to get all
countries to submit to it?</blockquote>
<div
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span
style="line-height:17.90625px;text-align:justify;font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif"><br>
</span></div>
<div style="text-align:justify;font-size:13px"><font
face="Arial, FreeSans, sans-serif"><span
style="line-height:17.899999618530273px">This
would have been better done if you had
avoided interpreting what I am saying, and
just quoted me as is your usual custom. </span></font></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
Chinmayi, relax, and just argue your positions without
getting personal!</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I thought I was doing exactly that. Apologies if you
saw it as getting personal. <br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
In fact, I should apologise... I completely misread your email
above. Just tense in-travel email browsing I suppose... sorry again.
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CACu5V_tVqZn4GcFF9AxBZC4OwBgYrWPLy3HY5cmi_TYabFsPCQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="im"><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="text-align:justify;font-size:13px"><font
face="Arial, FreeSans, sans-serif"><span
style="line-height:17.899999618530273px">I
believe what I said was: </span></font><span
style="font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif;line-height:17.90625px">"Although
I do like your vision of CIRP as something
that enables individual citizens, our
country's history with institutions like the
International Criminal Court and the ICCPR
Optional Protocol I does not really offer much
hope that India will ever submit itself to a
system in which it is accountable to
individuals in an international human rights
forum."</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
There isnt any big interpretative jump from saying that
one doesnt see much hope in a proposed institutional
mechanism, for the specific purpose in hand, to be taken
to suggest that one doesnt see any use in pursing that
particular proposal. But if instead you still find such
a proposal useful, just say it. <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<p dir="ltr"
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">It is
a jump to say that if one sees a particular flaw with a
solution, one is unwilling to discuss it.</p>
<p dir="ltr"
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Anyway,
i think i am bowing out of this thread. Apologies to all
our reluctant spectators. Hope to meet you all soon.</p>
<p dir="ltr"
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">
Best, <br>
</p>
<div><span
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Chinmayi</span> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><span class=""><font
color="#888888"> <br>
parminder <br>
</font></span>
<div>
<div class="h5"> <br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="text-align:justify;font-size:13px"><span
style="font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif;line-height:17.90625px"><br>
</span></div>
<div style="text-align:justify"><font
face="Arial, FreeSans, sans-serif"><span
style="line-height:17.90625px">I don't
think that it was fatalistic or a refusal
to discuss this further. It is an effort
to contribute to the discussion - I think
that models which rest completely on
unrealistic assumptions about what
governments will do (note that this does
not mean that we need to assume the
opposite) only mean that the models will
fail. So discussions of international
digital rights fora cannot completely
ignore the way in which the US and India
see their </span><span
style="line-height:17.899999618530273px">sovereignty</span><span
style="line-height:17.90625px"> in other
international human rights fora. Having
acknowledged this, I am very happy to
engage further, and look for ways in which
governments can be incentivised to consent
to some accountability, whether through
general human rights institutions or
specialised digital rights institutions.</span></font></div>
<div style="text-align:justify;font-size:13px"><span
style="font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif;line-height:17.90625px"><br>
</span></div>
<div style="text-align:justify;font-size:13px"><span
style="font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif;line-height:17.90625px"><br>
</span></div>
<div style="text-align:justify;font-size:13px"><font
face="Arial, FreeSans, sans-serif"><span
style="line-height:17.899999618530273px">As
far as CIRP is concerned, if we both agree
that it was not a digital rights
enforcement mechanism proposal, I think it
is fair for me to say that it would not
have created immediate accountability of
states to individuals. Whether it would
have inevitably resulted in the creation
of a </span></font><span
style="font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif;line-height:17.899999618530273px">digital
rights enforcement mechanism is a much
longer conversation, that we can save for
Bali.</span></div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at
11:40 PM, parminder <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"
target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div> <br>
<div>On Wednesday 16 October 2013 08:52
PM, Chinmayi Arun wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Hi Parminder,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sorry, I should have been
clearer - I did not see the UN
CIRP as offering much
accountability (as far as citizens
are concerned) when states commit
human rights violations. India has
not exactly had the best track
record when it comes to making
itself accountable before
international human rights
institutions for its domestic
policies (neither incidentally has
t</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
Chinmayi,<br>
<br>
A digital rights court or some other
rights enforcement mechanism is completely
at another level than having an anchor
agency in the UN system which can take up
IG related issues, which alone CIRP was
really supposed to be. In any case, to set
up such a digital rights enforcement
mechanism will need some kind of a prior
international agreement that, in the first
place, needs an IG related anchor space in
the UN system . .... So, even if you want
a digital rights enforcement mechanism -
which as you rightly observe, I too have
sought - then a CIRP kind of body can only
enable it... It doesnt go against such a
mechanise. If you want such enforcement
mechanism in addition to a CIRP like
space, then you put that demand as a CIRP
plus one..... which is entirely fine with
me. <br>
<br>
However, later in your email you say that
such an enforcement mechanism is also of
no use, because India would not submit to
it.... Well, isnt that a somewhat
fatalistic attitude to take towards future
of global governance of the Internet. What
other option there is to try to get such a
enforcement mechanism, and try to get all
countries to submit to it? Other than
perhaps to accept US as the global
policemen, a role which it often arrogates
to itself, wherever possible. There must
be some direction that is the right one
for us to go towards, however difficult
the path may be. <br>
<div> <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>he US). One must bear in mind
that domestic surveillance systems
are being built in India and that
there has been quite a lot of
resistance to government
transparency when it comes to
blocking or interception </div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
Yes, it has to resisted and fought in
every way possible. An international
regime - starting from a soft one towards
increasingly harder ones - as we progress
civilisationally - can only help that. On
the other hand, I cant see how such a
regime can hurt.
<div><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>(it is in this context that the
US activities are sometimes
offered as justification for
domestic policy).</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
I cant see what is the basis of such a
justification... But people can say
whatever they want, and we cant stop it. <br>
<span><font color="#888888"> <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
</font></span>
<div>
<div> <br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div> I do not therefore see the
UN CIRP proposal in the same
light as <span
style="line-height:17.90625px;text-align:justify;font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif">President
Rousseff's proposal which does
seem to be a call for states
to be accountable to
individuals. <br>
</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><span
style="line-height:17.90625px;text-align:justify;font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span
style="line-height:17.90625px;text-align:justify;font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif">I
do not think that our
political system offers much
recourse to surveillance at
the moment either - you can
hardly challenge a
surveillance order if you
never find out about it. <br>
</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><span
style="line-height:17.90625px;text-align:justify;font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span
style="line-height:17.90625px;text-align:justify;font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif">Although
I do like your vision of CIRP
as something that enables
individual citizens, our
country's history with
institutions like the
International Criminal Court
and the ICCPR Optional
Protocol I does not really
offer much hope that India
will ever submit itself to a
system in which it is
accountable to individuals in
an international human rights
forum.</span></div>
<div><span
style="line-height:17.90625px;text-align:justify;font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span
style="line-height:17.90625px;text-align:justify;font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif">See
you at the IGF :)</span></div>
<div><span
style="line-height:17.90625px;text-align:justify;font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif">Chinmayi</span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote"> On Wed,
Oct 16, 2013 at 8:32 PM,
parminder <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"
target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000">
<div> <br>
<div>On Wednesday 16
October 2013 07:54 PM,
Chinmayi Arun wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px
0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">We can't overlook
that the United
States is also a
member of the
Freedom Online
Coalition. Not to
mention say
Tunisia, which is
ranked a full
point lower than
India in the
Freedom House
survey. Given
that the "Internet
freedom" slogan
has suffered a
serious blow from
the NSA
revelations, it is
quite debatable
what was the
"wrong direction"
to take in
opposition to the
status-quoist
position on
Internet
governance taken
by the FOC states.</span></blockquote>
<div
class="gmail_extra"><font
face="arial,
sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div
class="gmail_extra"><font
face="arial,
sans-serif">I
could not agree
more. Even the
much-vilified ITU
treaty did not
really undermine
Internet freedom
(Article 1.1 (a)
says </font><span
style="line-height:17.90625px;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif">“These
Regulations do not
address the
content-related
aspects of
telecommunications”)
in the end.</span></div>
<div
class="gmail_extra">
<div
style="text-align:justify"><font
color="#000000"
face="Arial,
FreeSans,
sans-serif"><span
style="line-height:17.90625px"><br>
</span></font></div>
<div
style="text-align:justify"><font
color="#000000"
face="Arial,
FreeSans,
sans-serif"><span
style="line-height:17.90625px">It appears from her speech that President
Rousseff does
want UN
oversight of
countries with
respect to the
Internet.
Given that her
concern seems
to be that
there should
be some
accountability
with respect
to human
rights, I
sympathise.</span></font><span
style="line-height:17.90625px;font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif"> The
Indian
government seems
to be in
I-told-you-so
mode now,
pointing out
quite correctly
that while
everybody else
was being told
off for human
rights
violations, the
countries
telling them off
were also
committing huge
violations.
While I
certainly do not
subscribe to the
idea that one
nation's human
rights
violations
somehow justify
another's (I
still would not
support the
resolution that
India presented
to the UN last
year),</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
Hi Chinmayi, How does the
CIRP proposal translate into
human rights violations?
Also there is a specific and
clear difference between US
violating rights of people
in a situation where it
admits of no avenues of
recourse, even at a
theoretical -political
level, and when such things
happen within a political
system which has its
dynamics that can be engaged
to avoid or reduce such
violation. CIRP like global
governance proposals are
about having a global
political regime within
which then efforts can be
made to fight for our
rights, the way we do within
the Indian political system.
NSA issue cannot be put as
just one country doing
rights violation against
another country doing it. It
is of a qualitative
different kind, from the
very important issue of
domestic surveillances that
we all struggle against. <br>
<div> <br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div
class="gmail_extra">
<div
style="text-align:justify"><span
style="line-height:17.90625px;font-family:Arial,FreeSans,sans-serif"> I
can see why
Brazil and India
are unwilling to
accept
do-nothing as
the best model.
<br>
</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
Good point, But why then we
have no proposal anywhere
about what 'should be done',
or even the directions
towards that kind of a
thing. <br>
<br>
Best , parminder <br>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div
class="gmail_extra">
<div
style="text-align:justify"><font
color="#000000"
face="Arial,
FreeSans,
sans-serif"><span
style="line-height:17.90625px"><br>
</span></font></div>
<div
style="text-align:justify"><font
color="#000000"
face="Arial,
FreeSans,
sans-serif"><span
style="line-height:17.90625px">I have never been comfortable with
thinking about
issues purely
in terms of
who is on
which side.
This was my
discomfort
with the ITRs
debates - that
many were
stepping away
from the
actual text
and merely
pointing out
who was
signing as an
argument for
not signing.
Isn't it
better to just
discuss the
specifics of
treaties and
organisations
and determine
on that basis
whether it is
necessary,
helpful or
terrible to
subscribe to
them? </span></font></div>
<div
style="text-align:justify"><br>
</div>
Best,</div>
<div
class="gmail_extra">Chinmayi</div>
<div
class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div
class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div
class="gmail_quote">On
Wed, Oct 16, 2013
at 7:57 AM, Jeremy
Malcolm <span
dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:jeremy@ciroap.org" target="_blank">jeremy@ciroap.org</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px
0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div
bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000">
<div>
<div>On
16/10/13
08:49, Eduardo
Bertoni wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<p>For
instance, if
Brazil were to
join the <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.freedomonline.tn/Fr/home_46_4"
style="margin:0px;padding:0px;text-decoration:none;color:rgb(157,1,6)"
target="_blank">Freedom Online Coalition</a>, a group of governments
committed to
advance
Internet
freedom, it
would send a
positive
message to the
international
community.
Countries that
join the
coalition
endorse a
statement
supporting the
principle that
all people
enjoy the same
human rights
online as they
do offline.
From Latin
America, only
Costa Rica and
Mexico are
part of the
coalition. On
the other
hand, other
countries that
are not
members of the
coalition,
such as
Russia, China
and India,
have taken
steps in the
wrong
direction. For
example, in
the past, they
have presented
draft
resolutions to
the UN General
assembly,
which would
have put in
risk Internet
governance.
For Brazil,
joining the
Freedom Online
Coalition
would be a
turning point
and a step in
the opposite
direction,
demonstrating
that it takes
some distance
from its
partners in
groups such as
the BRIC
(Brazil,
Russia, India
and China) and
IBSA (India,
Brazil and
South Africa).</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
It would be
very
interesting to
read a reply
from the
perspective of
India. We
can't overlook
that the
United States
is also a
member of the
Freedom Online
Coalition.
Not to mention
say Tunisia,
which is
ranked a full
point lower
than India in
the Freedom
House survey.
Given that the
"Internet
freedom"
slogan has
suffered a
serious blow
from the NSA
revelations,
it is quite
debatable what
was the "wrong
direction" to
take in
opposition to
the
status-quoist
position on
Internet
governance
taken by the
FOC states.
Hmm.<br>
<br>
<div>-- <br>
<p
style="font-size:9pt"><b>Dr
Jeremy Malcolm<br>
Senior Policy
Officer<br>
Consumers
International
| the global
campaigning
voice for
consumers</b><br>
Office for
Asia-Pacific
and the Middle
East<br>
Lot 5-1 Wisma
WIM, 7 Jalan
Abang Haji
Openg, TTDI,
60000 Kuala
Lumpur,
Malaysia<br>
Tel: +60 3
7726 1599</p>
<p
style="font-size:9pt">Explore
our new
Resource Zone
- the global
consumer
movement
knowledge hub
| <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone"
target="_blank">http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone</a></p>
<p
style="font-size:9pt">@Consumers_Int
| <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.consumersinternational.org" target="_blank">www.consumersinternational.org</a>
| <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational" target="_blank">www.facebook.com/consumersinternational</a></p>
<p
style="font-size:8pt;color:rgb(153,153,153)">Read
our <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality"
target="_blank">email
confidentiality
notice</a>.
Don't print
this email
unless
necessary.</p>
<p><strong><span
style="color:red">WARNING</span></strong><span>: This email has not been
encrypted. You
are strongly
recommended to
enable PGP or
S/MIME
encryption at
your end. For
instructions,
see <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://jere.my/l/8m" target="_blank">http://jere.my/l/8m</a>.</span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>