[governance] Inputs for synthesis paper

Fri Sep 5 03:42:28 EDT 2008

Thanks Milton for this engagement. While, as you would expect, I have a lot
of issues with your amendments, this process of engagement and deliberation
is very useful. 

I request all others who think that the 'rights and the Internet' issue is
important, to please chip in. The time for engaging and contributing is
*now* when we are trying to make an input from IGC that is expected to be
used as crucial element in what we expect to become as a campaign for
getting 'rights and the Internet' as a mainstreamed framework for IGF's
discussions, in a similar manner as a rights framework is used in many other
global policy forums. We may want to use this framework as our principal
thrust for our engagements with the IGF. I am quite positive that if we can
get good civil society weight behind the 'rights and the Internet' agenda
there is a good chance that we can convince the powers-that-be to take it
seriously. One main problem with civil society's involvement with IG spaces
has been that it hasn't come up with a coherent alternative people-centered
agenda which can give it the needed leverage in these spaces. 

Now, about the issues with Milton's amendments, and my suggested amendments
to his amendments: 

First the most contested part of the statement 

"One important purpose of a discourse on rights should be to clarify and
reach greater consensus on how Internet rights are defined, how they relate
to pre-existing definitions of human rights, and which ones need to be
internationally recognized and strengthened. There are currently basic
philosophical differences, even among civil society actors, over what
constitutes a right and whether human rights inhere only in individuals or
can also be assigned to collectivities. "

"The openness and diversity of the internet are underpinned by widely
recognized (but still imperfectly enforced) basic human rights: the
individual right to freedom of expression and to privacy. To some,
conceptions of rights and the internet may also extend to the area of
positive and collective rights - for instance a right to Internet access, or
a right of cultural expression - including the right to have an Internet in
ones own language, which can inform the important IGF thematic area of
cultural diversity. Others contest these positive and collective claims,
viewing them as worthy policy goals but not as rights."

It is important to recognize that there are two important and different
contestations here. One, whether there is at all a category of positive and
collective rights in any case whatsoever. My personal view is that it is a
very small minority among the IGC membership that really contests the very
validity of the category of positive and collective rights. I invite
members' comments on this statement. Accordingly, I don't think an IGC
statement should go out casting doubts on the very validity of these
categories of rights. I would therefore want all corresponding parts of the
statement removed.

The second contestation is about whether there are some already accepted
extensions of positive and collective rights to the Internet - right to
access internet (positive right) and right to cultural expression or an
Internet in ones own language (a collective right). I agree that there may
not be enough consensus in this group at present to assert these rights, and
we may only speak of exploring them, and debating the pros and cons.
Accordingly, I am for mentioning the language of 'wanting to explore' with
regard to these rights. 

So I propose that the above paras be amended as below

"One important purpose of a discourse on rights should be to clarify and
reach greater consensus on how Internet rights are defined, how they relate
to pre-existing definitions of human rights, and which ones need to be
internationally recognized and strengthened."

"The openness and diversity of the internet are underpinned by widely
recognized (but still imperfectly enforced) basic human rights: the
individual right to freedom of expression and to privacy. It may also be
useful to explore if and whether positive and collective rights are
meaningful in relation to the Internet - for instance a right to Internet
access, or a right of cultural expression - including the right to have an
Internet in ones own language, which can inform the important IGF thematic
area of cultural diversity."

The second problem is about your addition of the following para

"We recognize that while it is relatively easy to articulate and claim
"rights" it is much more difficult to implement and enforce them. We also
recognize that rights claims can sometimes conflict or compete with each
other. For example, a claim that there is a "right to Internet access" may
imply an obligation on states to fund and provide such access, but it is
likely that if states are responsible for supplying internet access that
there will also be strong pressures on them to exert controls over what
content users can access using public funds and facilities.  There can also
be uncertainty about the proper application of a rights claim to a factual
situation. The change in the technical methods of communication often
undermines pre-existing understandings of how to apply legal categories. "

This para clearly makes out a strong case against 'right to the Internet'
and is obviously not acceptable to those who speak for it. I would delete
the whole para. 

I however find the last two sentences - which I know you state in terms of
meaningfulness of universal access - very interesting in terms of IPR in
digital space. But I discuss my issues with the IPR paragraph in a separate
email.

I also have problem with the new opening para that you propose.

"The Tunis Agenda (para. 42) invoked human rights when it reaffirmed a
global "commitment to the freedom to seek, receive, impart and use
information" and affirmed that "measures undertaken to ensure Internet
stability and security, to fight cybercrime and to counter spam, must
protect and respect the provisions for privacy and freedom of expression as
contained in the relevant parts of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
and the Geneva Declaration of Principles." However, little follow up work
has been done to enact these commitments to basic human rights in Internet
governance."

If one mentions rights in the IG arena it is by default read as FoE and
privacy rights. While these are basic and very important rights, our effort
is to explore the rights terrain much further. As argued in my earlier email
the possibility that a broad rights agenda may at ant time be globally
accepted as a good basis for IG related policy discussions also lies in
making the rights discourse broader, including concerns of what I call as
the vast majority of people, which go beyond these two rights. Mentioning
just these two rights in the opening para fall into the same trap, and in a
way defeats the purpose of anchoring a broader rights discourse in the IG
space.  I will either remove this part, or replace it by the reaffirmation
of  "the universality, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelation of
all human  rights and fundamental freedoms, including the right to
development, as enshrined in the Vienna Declaration" from the opening parts
of Geneva declaration. 

We can in addition mention that the Geneva declaration opens with
declaration of 

"our common desire and commitment to build a people-centred, inclusive and
development-oriented  Information Society, where everyone can create,
access, utilize and share information and knowledge, enabling individuals,
communities and peoples to achieve their full potential in promoting their
sustainable development and improving their quality of life, premised on the
purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and respecting
fully and upholding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights."

We need to move fast and close this in the next four days, but I think we
are making good progress. 

Parminder 

  _____  

From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu] 
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 12:22 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Parminder
Subject: RE: [governance] Inputs for synthesis paper

OK, I just made some extensive edits to the rights statement. A lot of the
small stuff was editorial, there was redundancy and awkwardness in many
sentences, perhaps reflecting the fragmentary approach of a shared doc. I
hope people agree on the stylistic improvements. 

Substantively, I tried to do two things: 

First, make it clearer that the definition and application of rights talk is
contested and complicated -- and use that to bolster the argument that that
makes it a good focus for IGF Egypt. In line with this, I added a quotation
from the Tunis Agenda at the beginning. 

Second, group and expand certain discussions to run in a more coherent and
structured manner. For example, there were scattered references to privacy
which I tried to consolidate in a single para. and expand a bit. 

For those not on the Google docs list I append the statement below

Milton Mueller
Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology
------------------------------
Internet Governance Project:
http://internetgovernance.org

IGC's input -1 to the synthesis paper for IGF, Hyderabad.

'Rights and the Internet' as the over-arching theme for IGF-4 in Egypt 

The Tunis Agenda (para. 42) invoked human rights when it reaffirmed a global
"commitment to the freedom to seek, receive, impart and use information" and
affirmed that "measures undertaken to ensure Internet stability and
security, to fight cybercrime and to counter spam, must protect and respect
the provisions for privacy and freedom of expression as contained in the
relevant parts of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva
Declaration of Principles." However, little follow up work has been done to
enact these commitments to basic human rights in Internet governance. 

The Internet Governance Caucus strongly recommends that 'Rights and the
Internet' be made the overarching theme for IGF-4 in Egypt, and that the
IGF-4's program be framed by the goal of developing a rights-based discourse
in the area of Internet Governance. The Caucus has already expressed support
for the letter on this subject which was sent to the MAG by the Dynamic
Coalition on an Internet Bill of Rights. The IGC offers the IGF assistance
in helping to shape such a discourse at the IGF meetings, and specifically
to help make 'Rights and the Internet' an overarching theme for IGF-4 in
Egypt. 

A complex new emerging ecology of rights and the internet

One important purpose of a discourse on rights should be to clarify and
reach greater consensus on how Internet rights are defined, how they relate
to pre-existing definitions of human rights, and which ones need to be
internationally recognized and strengthened. There are currently basic
philosophical differences, even among civil society actors, over what
constitutes a right and whether human rights inhere only in individuals or
can also be assigned to collectivities. 

The openness and diversity of the internet are underpinned by widely
recognized (but still imperfectly enforced) basic human rights: the
individual right to freedom of expression and to privacy. To some,
conceptions of rights and the internet may also extend to the area of
positive and collective rights - for instance a right to Internet access, or
a right of cultural expression - including the right to have an Internet in
ones own language, which can inform the important IGF thematic area of
cultural diversity. Others contest these positive and collective claims,
viewing them as worthy policy goals but not as rights.

Many important internet policy areas, like network neutrality, are being
framed in terms of rights, such as a right to access and share information,
or as an extension of freedom of expression itself. The right of the public
to access government-produced information presents itself in a wholly new
manner in a digital environment, where information is often publicly
sharable at little or no extra cost. Positive acts of withholding digital
public information from citizens in fact can be looked upon as a form of
censorship. All of these rights-based conceptions may be included in the IGF
openness theme area. Other rights such as the right of association and the
right to political participation may have important new implications in the
internet age, including the right to participate in the shaping of globally
applicable internet policies. 

While the internet opens unprecedented economic, social and political
opportunities in many areas, many fear that it may at the same time be
further widening economic, social and political divides. It is for this
reason that development has been a central theme for the IGF meetings to
date. In this new, more global and digital context it might be useful to
explore what the term "right to development" means. 

With respect to privacy rights, corporations and governments are
increasingly able to extend digital tentacles into people's homes and
personal devices, in manners invisible to consumers and citizens.Consumers
of digital products thus face new challenges including the right
<http://docs.google.com/RawDocContents?docID=dcskr5r9_7n2dnxhs&justBody=fals
e&revision=_latest&timestamp=1220550114112&editMode=true&strip=true#sdfootno
te3sym> to know and completely 'own' the products and services they pay for.
Technological measures to monitor and control user behavior on the internet
is becoming increasingly sophisticated, and often outrun public policies and
traditional concepts of what rights users have.

While property rights are of considerable importance, their applicability
and mutations in the the digital environment have led to widespread
political contention over the proper scope of copyrights, trademarks and
patents. In fact, intellectual property is emerging as a primary area of
socio-economic conflict in the information society.  The IGF can explore
issues surrounding the public interest principles which underpin IPR
alongside the concept of a right to access knowledge in the digital space.
It can also explore how individuals' property right to own, build, test, and
use consumer electronics, computers and other forms of equipment can be
reconciled with the regulation of technical circumvention to protect
copyrights.  

We recognize that while it is relatively easy to articulate and claim
"rights" it is much more difficult to implement and enforce them. We also
recognize that rights claims can sometimes conflict or compete with each
other. For example, a claim that there is a "right to Internet access" may
imply an obligation on states to fund and provide such access, but it is
likely that if states are responsible for supplying internet access that
there will also be strong pressures on them to exert controls over what
content users can access using public funds and facilities.  There can also
be uncertainty about the proper application of a rights claim to a factual
situation. The change in the technical methods of communication often
undermines pre-existing understandings of how to apply legal categories. 

These complexities, however, only strengthen the case for using the IGF to
explicitly discuss and debate these problems. There is no other global forum
where such issues can be raised and explored in a non-binding context. 

Internet governance has up to this time largely been founded in technical
principles and, increasingly, on the internet's functionality as a giant
global marketplace. With the internet becoming  increasingly central to many
social and political institutions, an alternative foundation and conceptual
framework for IG can be explored. It is the view of the IG Caucus that a
right-based framework will be may be appropriate for this purpose. 

It is the Caucus' view that the IGF is the forum best suited to take up this
task. This process should start at the IGF Hyderabad, where workshops on
rights issues are being planned.  These issues will also hopefully figure
prominently in the main sessions. The IGC fully expects that these
discussions will help the IGF work towards developing 'Rights and the
Internet' as the over-arching theme of the IGF-4 in Egypt. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20080905/3694c268/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