[governance] [Bill-of-Rights] Rights in IG research
Jaco Aizenman
skorpio at gmail.com
Tue Aug 12 16:07:37 EDT 2008
Dear Jeffrey, please read my answer to your email below....
> Well there are a few other courts to go through before one
> even gets a chance to have ones case heard before the supreme
> Court in the US.
Agree.
The bottom line is to have this new right added as a new fundamental right
in the Constitution. This will have implications not just for other Courts,
but also for many Government offices, including the FCC.
> That's not enforcement in any event. That's
> adjudication. Ergo you need a civics lesson or a refresher course.
I am always ready to learn more! ;-)
>
>
> Civil rights cases of course are heard by the US Supreme Court,
> but not all are heard. Those that are not, have usually been heard
> in lower courts and the US Supreme Court has in these instances
> either decided that the petition of appeal is not sufficient to be
> heard, or already agree with the lower courts ruling.
Agree.
>
>
> So with the sparse information you and Lisa have kindly
> provided, regarding a Internet Bill of Rights, seek to amend
> such rights already provided in the existing US Bill or Rights?
Can you please be kind to write this question again?. I want to be sure that
I understand the question before answering it.
>
> Is that correct? Further, what about such rights in other countries?
Ideally, every country should include this new right in the Constitution. In
Costa Rica, he Congress is studying to include this new fundamental right in
the Constitution. In Germany, one of the countries more advanced in the
world in legal developments, the Constitutional Court (Supreme Court)
already added this new fundamental right, a few months ago.
>
> Whom would enforce those?
Each country has its own systems to enforce human/fundamental rights. It
goes in many levels, as you wrote before (several types of Courts, and even
Government).
> The newly formed civil rights division
> of the International House of Justice perhaps?
Of course they can help, but most of the work will be in the National
Courts.
> How would such
> new rights be so recognized by such an august body without nearly
> every country's legal structure amended appropriately?
Agree. First the country legal structure has to change.
> And than
> yet again, how and who would be the enforcer in multi-jurisdictional
> cases?
Same as today with other fundamental rights.
> How would any ruling be upheld/enforced accordingly?
Same as today with other fundamental rights.
>
> And whom would be mandated to enforce such a ruling? Interpol
> perhaps? < shrug >
Same as today with other fundamental rights.
Thank you for your time Jeffrey!,
>
>
> Jaco Aizenman wrote:
>
> > Constitutional Courts. In USA for example, the US Supreme Court.
> >
> > On 8/10/08, Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > > 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<From%3Abill-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
> > >
> >
> > --
> > 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
>
> 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
>
--
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20080812/54e72bb3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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