[governance] RE: [Bill-of-Rights] Rights in IG research

Thu Aug 7 20:52:28 EDT 2008

Lisa and all,

  Excellent work here.  Well done!  I know that the US Constitution
and the US Bill of Rights fully supports the principals your
organization
proposes, as does our "Freedom of Expression" section in our bylaws.
Many other countries founding principals documents do as well.  Yet
unfortunately many countries whom fully recognize such rights have
and do currently fail to follow them or do not enforce them as they
are or were intended.  This unfortunately at times includes the US.

  Unfortunately, ICANN doesn't support such principals.  >:(
Hopefully they will eventually see the error in their ways and
endorse these well defined principals.

  I especially liked this section of your organizations "Bill-of-Rights"

principals:
http://www.freedomofexpression.org.uk/resources/5+content+layer

Lisa Horner wrote:

> Hi Max and all
>
> Thanks for your interest in what were doing.  Im equally interested
> in your work and in exploring potentials for collaboration.  Maybe we
> could start a research ideas and research in progress page on the
> bill of rights wiki?
>
> Apologies in advance for the length of this email  those who arent
> interested can delete email or go into skim-read mode now!
>
> The research were doing is as part of the ongoing Freedom of
> Expression Project.  I think Ive mentioned before that were working
> with 6 key partner organizations in different countries to develop
> policy principles that, if adhered to, would shape a global
> communications environment that would support human rights and a
> public interest communications environment.  They address issues
> spanning infrastructure, code and content.  The latest draft of the
> principles is available and open for comment at
> http://www.freedomofexpression.org.uk/resources/public+interest+principles+for+the+networked+communications+environment.
>
> The principles and values that they express are purposefully broad so
> that they can be tailored to specific contexts.  The idea is for them
> to provide an overarching framework for policy discussion and advocacy
> at different scales.  For example, our project partners are currently
> working to elaborate what they might mean in different country
> contexts, and this in turn will provide the foundations for policy
> work.  A major aim is to identify spaces where different stakeholders
> can agree that they share certain values and principles, and work to
> shape policy accordingly.
>
> We have been working to base all of our work so far in international
> human rights standards, in particular freedom of expression, the right
> to culture and the right to participation in government.  Weve taken
> an expansive definition of freedom of expression that many (but not
> all) human rights institutions and lawyers around the world take.
> This includes positive dimensions of freedom of expression, including
> the notion that governments are responsible for putting the necessary
> structures/infrastructures in place for the right to be realized.
> Incidentally, thats why I dont believe that we need to be advocating
> for new rights such as the right to the internet or to communication.
> The sentiments and demands expressed by these new rights are already
> contained within the human rights system.  In my opinion, our energy
> should be focused on further developing and upholding what we have
> already, for example, further embedding expansive definitions of
> freedom of expression in rights and policy institutions.  And, as
> Anriette and Milton importantly pointed out, in furthering/developing
> understanding about what international rights standards and compliance
> with them actually means in practice.
>
> The research that I referred to before is intended to contribute to
> this effort, illustrating how an expansive definition of freedom of
> expression is being supported in contemporary legal and philosophical
> thought and case law, and identifying areas where further work needs
> to be done.  It is taking our policy principles framework as a
> starting point, ensuring that it is firmly rooted in the international
> human rights system.  In this way, if the framework was used as a
> basis for policy discussion, human rights standards would effectively
> be mainstreamed within the discussions.
>
> Whilst Im sure some would make the argument that these arent IG
> issues, we hope that were making a positive contribution towards
> ensuring that the shared norms and principles that shape the use and
> evolution of the internet are rooted in human rights standards.
> These are the most widely accepted and acknowledged ethical standards
> in the world, which (in reference to earlier conversations) is why it
> makes sense to us to work with them and build on them, rather than try
> to reinvent or disregard them.
>
> Ill leave it there for now, but Im interested to hear anybodys
> thoughts on the work were doing,  and am keen to explore
> opportunities to collaborate on further research on any of these
> issues.
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Lisa
>
> From: bill-of-rights-bounces at ipjustice.org
> [mailto:bill-of-rights-bounces at ipjustice.org] On Behalf Of Max Senges
>
> Sent: 06 August 2008 17:36
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Anriette Esterhuysen;
> bill-of-rights at ipjustice.org
> Subject: [Bill-of-Rights] Rights in IG research
> dear lisa and all
>
> Lisa wrote:
> > We've just commissioned some research into how policy principles
> based
> > around notions such as net neutrality, interoperability, universal
> > access and content diversity can be rooted in the international
> human
> > rights system which will hopefully yield some interesting
> insights...
>
> that sounds very interesting. Stanford lawschool's Center for Internet
> and Society has offered to collaborate by contributing research and i
> agreed to frame research opportunities/themes for student projects to
> be taken up in the fall.
>
> It would be great to team up or at least be aware of all the other
> research undertaken to better understand a Rights based approach to
> IG.
>
> Lisa could you share a bit more info about Global Partners research?
>
> Everybody else doing research work in this area is very much invited
> to get in touch so we can ensure we complement, share and avoid
> duplication
>
> best
> max
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 5:37 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen
> <anriette at apc.org> wrote:
>
> Hallo all
>
> Lisa, you are correct in that the SA Human Rights Commission is the
> appropriate
> institution to deal with this. In fact they deal with hate speech
> issues quite often.
>
> They are under-resourced, but they do do excellent work.  Here is
> their URL
> http://www.sahrc.org.za/sahrc_cms/publish/cat_index_26.shtml
>
> Draft hate speech legislation has been before parlaiment a few times
> here in South
> Africa.  I am not sure what the status is. If I remember correctly the
> draft bill was badly
> not well conceived and very controversial.
>
> I certainly think that making a formal complaint to the HRC (human
> rights
> commission) would the way to start if the intension is to create
> public awareness of
> the issue.
>
> It will also drive lots of traffic to the site.... which is less
> desirable.  Personally, Rui, I
> would just ignore it.
>
> Lisa, I completely agree with you about the relationship between
> rights and internet
> governance. Sadly I think that we have lost ground since WSIS.  As you
> say there is a
> lot of work to be done to get beyond rights rhetoric and to work out
> what the
> implementable rights-based public policy principles are that we can
> work with on
> specific issues, e.g. those you mention, for example net-neutrality.
> APC tries to adopt
> this approach in our access work.
>
> I also think that the mainstream human rights movement has not engaged
> this terrain
> enough, altough there are exceptions.
>
> Anriette
>
>
> Date sent:              Wed, 6 Aug 2008 12:09:58 +0100
> From:                   "Lisa Horner" <lisa at global-partners.co.uk>
> To:                     <governance at lists.cpsr.org>,
>        "Rui Correia" <correia.rui at gmail.com>
> Subject:                RE: [governance] Taking down a site [was:
> beijing ticket scam]
> Send reply to:          governance at lists.cpsr.org,"Lisa Horner"
> <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?
> >
> > So many of our discussions around internet governance issues can be
> > approached from a rights perspective, but human rights lawyers and
> > institutions are usually absent from the debate.  Human rights and
> > their associated tools and mechanisms are arguably one of the only
> > global governance institutions that is 'thickening' in the current
> age
> > of 'globalisation'.  Human rights approaches also have an inbuilt
> > framework for balancing out tensions between different rights and
> > responsibilities.  However, there's still a lot of work to be done
> in
> > bringing them up to date and ensuring that they're capable of
> dealing
> > with new issues, including those relating to freedom of expression
> and
> > the internet.  I wonder if engaging directly with national human
> > rights institutions is one way of starting that process?
> >
> > In a way, this is linked to Anriette's comment that many new
> campaigns
> > around rights are a-historical.  Similarly, I think that they should
>
> > be rooted in, or at least have a firm understanding of, existing
> human
> > rights institutions, both formal and informal and at all scales.
> > We've just commissioned some research into how policy principles
> based
> > around notions such as net neutrality, interoperability, universal
> > access and content diversity can be rooted in the international
> human
> > rights system which will hopefully yield some interesting
> insights...
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Lisa
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Anriette Esterhuysen, Executive Director
> Association for Progressive Communications
> anriette at apc.org
> http://www.apc.org
> PO Box 29755, Melville, South Africa. 2109
> Tel. 27 11 726 1692
> Fax 27 11 726 1692
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------------
> "It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the
> strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done
> better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena;
> whose face is marred by the dust and sweat and blood; who strives
> valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the
> great enthusiasms, the great devotions and spends himself in a worthy
> cause; ... so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid
> souls who know neither victory or defeat."
> - THEODORE ROOSEVELT
> (Paris Sorbonne,1910)
>
> -------------------------------------------------
> Dr. Max Senges
> Stanford Post-Doc Visiting Scholar
> UOC Research Associate
> Freelance Consultant
>
> 98 Loyola Ave., Menlo Park, California 94025
>
> US-Phone: (001) 650 714 9826
>
> www.maxsenges.com
> www.knowledgeentrepreneur.com
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
My Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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