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

Jeffrey A. Williams jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Mon Aug 11 01:02:02 EDT 2008


Jaco, Lisa and all,

  I fully support a comprehensive Internet Bill of Rights.  What
I always come back to though, is if broadly adopted, whom would
enforce them for all?  The UN?  ICANN?, the ITU?, US Congress,
or some other governmental entity?

Jaco Aizenman wrote:

> Dear Lisa,
>
> Thank you for the  FoE link, which is very impressive and I support.
> Let me know if I can help in any way the FoE from Costa Rica.
>
> Please also note that a new virtual personality fundamental right is
> complementary to FoE, and can enhance even more the FoE initiative. Of
> course it has to be done in the right way....
>
> If Constitutional Courts worldwide will have a clear and good virtual
> personality fundamental right (Internet rights) it will be much easier
> to implement fully the FoE initiative and vice versa.
>
> Don´ t you like or support the first, worldwide, "internet right",
> made a few months ago by the German Constitutional Court?.
>
> Thanks a lot for your time.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jaco
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 5:31 AM, Lisa
> Horner <lisa at global-partners.co.uk> wrote:
>
>      Hi Max and all
>
>      Thanks for your interest in what we're doing.  I'm 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 aren't interested can delete email or go into skim-read
>      mode now!
>
>      The research we're doing is as part of the ongoing Freedom
>      of Expression Project.  I think I've mentioned before that
>      we're 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.  We've 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, that's why I don't 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 I'm sure some would make the argument that these
>      aren't IG issues, we hope that we're 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.
>
>      I'll leave it there for now, but I'm interested to hear
>      anybody's thoughts on the work we're 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
>      maxOn 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
>      ------------------------------------------------------------
>      _______________________________________________
>      Bill-of-Rights mailing list
>      Bill-of-Rights at ipjustice.org
>      http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/bill-of-rights
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Jaco Aizenman L.
> My iname is =jaco (http://xri.net/=jaco)
> XDI Board member - www.xdi.org
> Tel/Voicemail: 506-83461570
> Costa Rica
>
> What is an i-name?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-name
>
>
>
> --
> Jaco Aizenman L.
> My iname is =jaco (http://xri.net/=jaco)
> XDI Board member - www.xdi.org
> Tel/Voicemail: 506-83461570
> Costa Rica
>
> What is an i-name?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-name
>
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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



More information about the Governance mailing list