[governance] Taking down a site [was: beijing ticket scam]

[Lisa Horner]

I agree that this might not be the best or most clear cut case to start
working with.  But basically what I'm trying to suggest is that we try
and work out how to build on the 60 years of development of the
international human rights system so that it is capable of addressing
and providing guidance on relevant social and ethical issues that have
arisen with the evolution of the internet.  The system includes
frameworks for balancing out tensions between competing rights and
responsibilities - indeed in this particular case it could well be ruled
that the site doesn't constitute sufficient 'incitement to cause harm'
to justify action.  Obviously the system isn't geared to rule on issues
such as the Beijing scam - there are more appropriate arenas for that
(although I think we'd all agree that they can't argue against
regulation of their site on free expression grounds...).  But it's
exactly these kinds of grey issues around FoE that the human rights
system is capable of dealing with, or at least should be.  

I just think that it's important that the human rights framework is used
in the first place - to benefit from its 60 years of evolving to deal
with such issues, to ensure that it is kept up to date with salient
issues of our time and to ensure that norms underlying internet
governance support human rights.  Obviously dealing with cases in this
way wouldn't work in regions that do not have human rights institutions
that act in accordance with international standards.  But South Africa
has one of the most progressive rights regimes in the world, supported
in turn by the African Charter and the Declaration of Principles on
Freedom of Expression in Africa - the most progressive elaboration of
FoE in any international agreement (depending of course on your
interpretation of 'progressive').  Cases might of course have different
outcomes in different countries according to different conceptions of
rights, the most obvious being between the USA and other countries
concerning acceptable limitations on FoE.  But the human rights system
has developed to cope with 'trans-boundary' differences of
interpretation and opinion: it's by no means perfect but it hasn't
collapsed because of them.

Rather than avoiding using the human rights framework for fear that it
will serve as a cover for restrictions on rights, we need to work with
and develop the system to make sure that it's capable of addressing
these issues.  I'm keen to work out how we can do this.

I'm thinking in terms wider than the specific issue of what constitutes
acceptable limitations on FoE.  But in this specific case, in short, the
tools and systems are in place to determine whether Rui's site does
constitute a violation of rights in South Africa, or whether, as you
argue, a legitimate means of expression as they would be ruled to be in
the USA (and as Rony pointed out, possibly elsewhere).  The fact that
they are in place is a positive thing that we can build on and work
with.

-----Original Message-----
From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu] 
Sent: 06 August 2008 15:02
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Lisa Horner; Rui Correia
Subject: RE: [governance] Taking down a site [was: beijing ticket scam]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lisa Horner [mailto:lisa at global-partners.co.uk]
> 
> Echoing Ian, I wonder if it would be worth filing a complaint with the
> South African Human Rights Commission?  The SA bill of rights states
that
> freedom of expression doesn't extend to "advocacy of hatred that is
based
> on race, ethnicity, gender or religion, and that constitutes
incitement to
> cause harm." Is this supported by any other legislation in SA?

Lisa:
As Rui herself said, the site does not contain incitement to harm. It's
political speech: an old and defeated racist party publicizing its
views, which of course are pretty stupid. 

I'm sorry but I don't see anything here but an attempt to suppress
expression that you don't like. The problem with the website is just
that she, and you, disagree with it and find it offensive. 

Let's be honest about this.

Rui:
> I am personally a defender of freedom of expression. However, like any
> other right, the right to freedom of expression has limitations, such

How many times have I heard this? Exactly what the Chinese state and
everyone else interested in censorship says. They all "support freedom
of expression," except when someone says something they feel threatened
by or strongly disagree with.

That kind of "support" is worthless.

The underlying message is clear: you are saying "if I don't agree with
what you say, I have the right to use force to suppress you." From that
point on it's just a political competition to see who or what gets
suppressed. I don't see any difference in principle between this and the
attempts of, e.g., Islamic fanatics to kill Salman Rushdie or Ayaan
Hirsi Ali for their heresies. Insulting the prophet or criticizing Islam
is, in their world view, just as reprehensible as racism is to you.
Perhaps even more so. 

What's bizarre and disturbing about this is the appropriation of "human
rights" terminology by people who clearly just don't understand the
moral, political and philosophical basis of free expression. 

At least when radical Islamists or Chinese authoritarians suppress
speech, they don't say they are doing it in the name of "human rights."
This misappropriation is far more dangerous than a clear authoritarian,
because at least you know what the dictators are up to.

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance