<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<i>"If a national constitution contains proivisions to that effect,
then there is a right to education that should enable citizens to bring
action against the state." (Jeanette)<br>
</i><br>
In the same manner, the constitution can have a provision for a 'right
to the internet', which would enable citizens to bring action against
the state for its non provision - how is this proposition inherently
contradictory with what you have said above? <br>
<br>
As for accountability, the process of establishing a right and that of
having a process of enforcing it go hand in hand - there is no logic
that the 'accountability structures' should be perfect before the right
is accepted. In fact the very acceptance of a right is a force that
would compel the state to accelerate measures to that would help it be
accountable for its non provision. Just as the UDHR acts as a moral
pressure on certain Governments<br>
<br>
<i>"I remember a long debate in Germany about a "right to work". This
wasn't added to the constitution because it was said that the
government is not in a position to guarantee a sufficient number of
jobs. "(Jeanette)<br>
</i><br>
Coincidentally, a recent landmark legislation in India has been the
'National Rural Employment Gurantee Act (NREGA)' which establishes a
right on part of an unemployed person under certain contexts to get
employment. This example certainly suggests that it would be difficult
to argue that universally there cannot be any right to the internet' on
the conceptually shallow grounds of 'enforceability', which is what
Milton seems to be advocating. <br>
<br>
I suggest that the way forward would be to nuance this issue - under
what circumstances and contexts should there be a collective
accountability (Milton however much you detest the notion of the
collective, the state, which is usually the body against which rights
are enforced, is a representative of the collective of society within
the political boundaries of a nation) for providing a right to the
internet? And if the IGF is a fora for discussing and nuancing
understanding and building common ground on IG issues, then it is the
right place to discuss and debate this right. <br>
<br>
If we accept the right to education (and I am eager to hear anybody on
this list assert that the right to education is invalid), it is
illogical not to accept the right to the internet. As Avri has argued
so persuasively, "The Internet was designed to be an educational tool -
and has
become an indispensable part of learning about today's world and, i
would argue, it is impossible to be fully literate in today's world
with having learnd the Internet and through the Internet about the
world. So I would argue that the right to a multilingual Internet is a
derivative of the fundamental right of education".
<br>
<br>
Education is itself socially determined and it is difficult to argue
that education can be meaningful today if it completely excludes the
internet. (Even Milton has not been able to clearly deny the right to
education). The basic goal of education is to prepare the learner for
negotiating with his/her world and with the internet increasingly an
integral part of the world of today and even more of tomorrow, keeping
the learner away from internet (by not actively providing for those who
cannot access it for reasons of resources, capacities etc) strongly
reduces the meaning of education. This process need not cover only
children but also adults who need such education. <br>
<br>
Just a PO - is it a coincidence that those arguing for the 'narrowness
of rights' belong to social groups for who the access to the internet
is a non-issue? whereas in societies with such inequities that
significant sections of population would not have the resources or
capacities to use the internet, such rights have great meaning for
those populations.<br>
<br>
regards,<br>
Guru<br>
<br>
<br>
Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:48BE7D2F.7040500@wzb.eu" type="cite"><br>
<br>
Parminder wrote: <br>
<blockquote type="cite">Jeannette <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">A narrow interpretation restricts rights to
those that enable rights <br>
holders to file a suit against those who violate the right. I don't see
<br>
who could be held accountable for the lack of "an Internet in ones own <br>
language". The latter might be a political goal but it certainly
doesn't <br>
sound like a right to me. <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
How do you see 'right to education' then - a question that has come up
here <br>
earlier? Do you or do you not believe in such a right? <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
If a national constitution contains proivisions to that effect, then
there is a right to education that should enable citizens to bring
action against the state. <br>
In Germany, citizens can submit cases to the constitutional court if
they think their constitutional rights have been violated. <br>
I remember a long debate in Germany about a "right to work". This
wasn't added to the constitution because it was said that the
government is not in a position to guarantee a sufficient number of
jobs. I mention this here as it seems to describe a similar situation. <br>
jeanette <br>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
Who could be held accountable for lack of 'educational facilities'? In
the <br>
same way that the state and other political formations can be held <br>
'accountable' for lack of educational facilities, and thereby
'violating' <br>
ones right to education, these political entities can be held
'accountable' <br>
for other things if they are collectively found to be 'basic' to
worthwhile <br>
human existence and such. <br>
On another note, the language of rights is often used to develop
alternative <br>
conceptions to state centered notions of development, security, culture
etc <br>
to move toward a more people-centric one. The problem with global
Internet <br>
policy making is that it is not desirable to leave it to state-centric <br>
notions. The alternative is that we propose a people-centric one which
is <br>
built on people's rights vis a vis the Internet. This is what we are
trying <br>
to do, and, accordingly, this debate is not an idle one. <br>
(For instance the logic of 'security' used by many repressive countries
in a <br>
state-centric manner in order to take control of the Internet may need
to be <br>
countered by use of language of 'right to human security' on the
Internet as <br>
it is being used in the offline world.) <br>
<br>
(1)There could be a global Internet policy regime that, as today,
remains <br>
centered on existing hegemonies. <br>
(2) It could move towards a state-centric system which can break
existing <br>
hegemonies, but as we all know it would be as bad, or worse. <br>
<br>
(3) We can try alternative political frameworks. My view is that such a
<br>
framework needs to be based on, and built over, a strong conception of
human <br>
rights in the new Internet era. However, restrictive definitions that
serve <br>
those who are at present politically dominant will neither be
legitimate not <br>
acceptable to the big majority. And we won't make any process.
Accordingly, <br>
we will remain caught in situation (1) above or move towards(2). <br>
<br>
Parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">-----Original Message----- <br>
From: Jeanette Hofmann [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:jeanette@wzb.eu">mailto:jeanette@wzb.eu</a>] <br>
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 4:38 PM <br>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>;
Parminder <br>
Cc: 'McTim'; 'Milton L Mueller' <br>
Subject: Re: [governance] Inputs for synthesis paper <br>
<br>
Hi, <br>
<br>
it seems this is a debate we have to repeat again and again. I am no <br>
expert on matters of right but I lean towards a narrow interpretation
of <br>
the term right. It makes sense to me to protect its meaning against an <br>
inflating use to avoid devaluation. <br>
A narrow interpretation restricts rights to those that enable rights <br>
holders to file a suit against those who violate the right. I don't see
<br>
who could be held accountable for the lack of "an Internet in ones own <br>
language". The latter might be a political goal but it certainly
doesn't <br>
sound like a right to me. <br>
<br>
jeanette <br>
<br>
Parminder wrote: <br>
<blockquote type="cite">This was before the notion of a "right to
the Internet in <br>
<blockquote type="cite">every language" language, that is my
"bridge too far". <br>
<br>
-- <br>
Cheers, <br>
<br>
McTim <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I did not propose that part (though I agree with it). Hanane did, who <br>
</blockquote>
being <br>
<blockquote type="cite">from an Arab country may have felt its
necessity more strongly than many <br>
others. You may give your reasons and deliberate with her and we can <br>
</blockquote>
proceed <br>
<blockquote type="cite">accordingly. <br>
<br>
BTW, the 'right to have an Internet in ones own language' has its <br>
</blockquote>
equivalent <br>
<blockquote type="cite">in the 'right to have education in ones
mother tongue' which is spoken <br>
</blockquote>
of <br>
<blockquote type="cite">inter alia in the framework of 'education
for all'. The IGF, Hyderabad's <br>
overall theme 'Internet for All' was taken from this concept. <br>
<br>
Parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">-----Original Message----- <br>
From: McTim [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:dogwallah@gmail.com">mailto:dogwallah@gmail.com</a>] <br>
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 2:36 PM <br>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>;
Parminder <br>
Cc: Milton L Mueller <br>
Subject: Re: [governance] Inputs for synthesis paper <br>
<br>
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Parminder
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"><parminder@itforchange.net></a>
<br>
wrote: <br>
pen. McTim, who <br>
<blockquote type="cite">now supports you on this, did use the
pen on the draft text. <br>
</blockquote>
I edited for length and a bit of style, cutting out some strong <br>
rhetoric. This was before the notion of a "right to the Internet in <br>
every language" language, that is my "bridge too far". <br>
<br>
-- <br>
Cheers, <br>
<br>
McTim <br>
mctim.blogspot.com <br>
____________________________________________________________ <br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list: <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a> <br>
To be removed from the list, send any message to: <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a>
<br>
<br>
For all list information and functions, see: <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
____________________________________________________________ <br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list: <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a> <br>
To be removed from the list, send any message to: <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a>
<br>
<br>
For all list information and functions, see: <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
____________________________________________________________ <br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list: <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a> <br>
To be removed from the list, send any message to: <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a>
<br>
<br>
For all list information and functions, see: <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
____________________________________________________________ <br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list: <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a> <br>
To be removed from the list, send any message to: <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a>
<br>
<br>
For all list information and functions, see: <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>