[governance] [Bill-of-Rights] Rights in IG research
Jeffrey A. Williams
jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Mon Aug 11 23:28:37 EDT 2008
Jaco and all,
My remarks, response and thoughts interspersed below Jaco's.
Jaco Aizenman wrote:
> 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.
>
> Ok, but you realize that in the US anyway, the Constitution has
> not been amended in quite some time. Adding additional rights
> as they apply to the US "Bill of Rights" a US founding document,
> might be a better way to go. Although I don't believe that the
> US "Bill of Rights" has ever been amended... So to do so is a very
> steep hill to climb and will likely take years if not decades.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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! ;-)
>
> Same here.
>
>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
> Does the Internet "Bill of Rights" being proposed seek to
> supplement/amend any other countries equivelent?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
> Well Costa Rica isn't exactly a first world country with a stable
> political atmosphere. Germany has gone a long ways in expanding
> users Internet rights and protections, as well has regressed on the
> norm for same. So 2 countries does not a global consensus make,
> but it's a tiny start! >:)
>
>
> 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).
>
> Yes I am fully aware as I have lived in three countries in my
> lifetime
> so far. Most have very little enforcment of Civil rights of any sort
> that is substancial. Those that do, the individual cost is
> prohibitive
> to the average user/stakeholder to get enforced.
>
>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
> Agreed.
>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
> Ok. I hope you realize I doubt that I will live longe enough
> before enough countries achieve this very lofty goal. Very steep
> hill here. Just being realistic...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> And than
> yet again, how and who would be the enforcer in
> multi-jurisdictional
> cases?
>
> Same as today with other fundamental rights.
>
> Well I guess than we can not count on Russia or China, and not
> likely Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Syeria.
>
>
>
>
>
> How would any ruling be upheld/enforced accordingly?
>
> Same as today with other fundamental rights.
>
> Ok, so again same as just above, I guess than we can not count
> on Russia or China, and not likely Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Syeria,
> at least not in my life time.
>
> And whom would be mandated to enforce such a ruling?
> Interpol
> perhaps? < shrug >
>
> Same as today with other fundamental rights.
>
> Ok so very little enforcment in most countries, no third world
> countries, and no purely nationalistic countries. And very few
> middle income to lower income users/stakeholders can
> reasonably expect in the near term, any significant enforcment.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thank you for your time Jeffrey!,
>
> Welcome! And thank you for your frank and prompt responses...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
> > >> [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
>
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