[governance] THEME PROPOSAL: internet content filtering and free expression

[Milton Mueller]

FYI: This proposal is backed by Internet Governance Project and RSF, and will probably be obtaining the support of several other digital rights groups. 

Internet content filtering and free expression

a. A concise formulation for the proposed theme

Are the Internet filtering and censorship practices of states compatible with Article XIX of the UN declaration on human rights? Is it possible to develop a protocol to guide private Internet service providers and hosting companies toward ethical interactions with the governments 
of countries that heavily regulate and censor content? How can countries with different notions of legal and illegal content reconcile these differences in a way that maximizes the freedom and value of the Internet and makes it possible for internet service providers to operate in a more secure and stable legal environment?

b. A brief description of why it is important

Access to information and free communication is at the heart of the Internet's value. Conflicts 
over content controls have created a number of tensions, e.g., between multinational internet 
service companies such as Google, Yahoo and Compuserve and various national governments. 
Content regulation, filtering and censorship are issues that do not fall within the scope of any 
existing international body, but cut across many of them; e.g., UNESCO, ICANN, ITU and WIPO.

c. How it is in conformity with the Tunis Agenda

Paragraph 42 of the Tunis Agenda reaffirms the UN's "commitment to the freedom to seek, 
receive, impart and use information, in particular, for the creation, accumulation and 
dissemination of knowledge." Paragraph 46 encourages "governments to reaffirm the right of 
individuals to access information according to the Geneva Declaration of Principles and other 
mutually agreed relevant international instruments, and to coordinate internationally as appropriate." Paragraph 60 expresses the recognition that "there are many cross-cutting international public policy issues that require attention and are not adequately addressed by 
the current mechanisms."

d. How it fits within the mandate of the IGF as detailed in para 72;

Paragraph 72(a) empowers the Forum to "discuss public policy issues related to key elements of 
Internet governance in order to foster the sustainability, robustness, security, stability and development of the Internet." 72(b) mandates it to "facilitate discourse between bodies 
dealing with different cross-cutting international public policies regarding the Internet and discuss issues that do not fall within the scope of any existing body."

e. Who are the main actors in the field, who could be encouraged to participate in the thematic session?

There are no "main actors" in this area but a wide variety of actors, e.g., individual 
dissidents, national and multinational internet service providers, national governments, civil 
society advocacy groups, professional associations in the news media, content rating standards proponents, and international organizations.

f. Why this issue should be addressed in the first annual meeting of the Forum rather than in 
subsequent ones

Freedom of expression is so fundamental to the Internet that it would be hypocritical to avoid 
it. Many criticisms and rejections of UN involvement in the Internet stem from fears that international governmental pressures will be used to control and burden the Internet. These 
concerns could be dispelled if this agenda item was included at the outset.




_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance