[governance] Statement by IGC supporting rights and principles

[Fouad Bajwa]

Hi Meryem,

My intention earlier was neither to start a new argument nor go into
any other direction of things. Please be clear on this. As for the IGC
interventions on the issues of Internet Rights, members from CS will
be able to confirm that I was actively participating and deliberating
on these issues at the open consultations and MAG meetings.

Just in case this isn't on IGC record, we have intervened on the
Internet Rights issue at the May meetings in Geneva as well as during
the MAG meetings and thus have brought it on the table of the IGF. The
problem is, that I personally felt, vagueness to the term Internet
Rights and what it refers to for the other anti-internet rights groups
to twist and confuse the pursuit. Yes the documents on Human Rights
are available and we continuously quote them, but the funnelling down
with a focus on Internet is not happening and then we find countries
like China and other private sector lobbyists throwing out the topic
of the window. The APC Internet Rights document is there but again,
that is attributed to a single organization because it says APC
Internet Rights Charter and within a multilateral scope of issues and
interventions, either many more have to team up with APC or there
should be a more strengthened backing to it.

I think my comment was taken in a different understanding, indeed the
intention in not a battle, the intention is simply to refer back to
the particular clauses like a footnote or something.

Once again, I will be at my end raising the issue of Internet Rights
and IG4D in meeting and the IGF. Secondly, I have plans to get in
touch with CS organizations and groups from the various countries of
the developing world and pursue a more focused pressure group to
convince the IGF to take on Internet Rights and IG4D as main session
themes.

Just in case, this discussion may be paused here to complete the IGC
IR statement and we can discuss this face to face with IGC/CS
participants during the EuroDIG session on IR or the IGF Preparatory.

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Meryem Marzouki<marzouki at ras.eu.org> wrote:
> Fouad,
>
> a couple of anwers below. Meryem
>
> Le 3 sept. 09 à 14:07, Fouad Bajwa a écrit :
>
>> There are two things I thought I'd share.......
>>
>> First can we explicitly mention the particular article/clause number
>> from the WSIS Principles and the Tunis Agenda so that when the
>> statement is read, it is recorded accurately during the preparatory.
>
> You may have noticed that it's not a quote of WSIS Decl. or TA, rather a
> general reminder. As a matter of fact, the word "centrality" is not
> explicitly used in these texts, but rather in the CS Decl. The goal is not
> here to argue with clauses or articles. The discussion at next preparatory
> meeting is not expected to turn into a legal battle over these texts that
> anyone car refer to - at least I hope so.
> If really felt needed, one may refer to the first part of the Decl ("our
> common vision of the information society"), especially para. 1-5 of the
> Decl. Similar references can be found in the Tunis Commitment, and in the TA
> (e.g. paras 42, 44, 46, etc.).
> Again, I strongly advise not to enter into this.
>
>> Secondly, can we have a backup document on Internet Rights, not
>> particularly the APC one but a very independent one specifically from
>> IGC that can be sent with this statement to the IGF Secrertariate.
>
> As for now, the international bill of rights (UDHR + the two international
> covenants on civil and political rights and on economic social and cultural
> rights) or even the sole UDHR are enough. There are no such "Internet
> rights", but human rights as they apply on the internet. Charters such as
> the APC one tries to define such application. And the whole point of this
> IGC statement and of the existence of many coalitions, like the IRP one, is
> to try to discuss and commonly agree on how HR translates in the ifnromation
> society. It's easy to understand that if such a "very independent" document
> exists, then the whole discussion and the statement wouldn't be necessary.
> Thus the request is, as for now, to officially put the issue on the IGF
> table.
>
> Best,
> Meryem ____________________________________________________________
> 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.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
____________________________________________________________
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