[governance] Sovereignty and the Geography of Cyberspace

Fri Dec 7 10:37:39 EST 2012

Dear all,

Jovan has launched in the post below a very interesting topic that moved a
bit out of McTim's initial call for buying a boat. Hence the separate
thread (also shared on the IRP list).

I have just posted a piece on CircleID on the topic of "Sovereignty and the
Geography of Cyberspace<http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121204_sovereignty_and_the_geography_of_cyberspace/>"
that touches upon some of Jovan's comments. It follows a workshop that
the Internet
& Jurisdiction Project <http://www.internetjurisdiction.net>  organized at
the Baku IGF. I hope you'll find it interesting. Comments welcome.

One point I would like to highlight is that the Council of Europe in a
recommendation
of its Council of Ministers <https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1835707> in
September 2011, established the principle of responsibility of States for
transboundary harm:

*1.1. No harm*

*1.1.1. States have the responsibility to ensure, in compliance with the
standards recognised in international human rights law and with the
principles of international law, that their actions do not have an adverse
transboundary impact on access to and use of the Internet.*

*1.1.2. This should include, in particular, the responsibility to ensure
that their actions within their jurisdictions do not illegitimately
interfere with access to content outside their territorial boundaries or
negatively impact the transboundary flow of Internet traffic.*

During very interesting workshops in Baku, including one from the Council
of europe, this principle was explored further. Jovan rightly posits that
if it means a responsibility to prevent any action on their territory that
would create transboundary harm, it could be misused to justify
surveillance and censorship.

This is why the drafting group (Wolfgang, Rolf Weber, Michael Yakushev,
Christian Singer and myself) carefully restricted this principle to the
action of states themselves. Responsibility for transboundary harm should
be a natural corollary of the exercise of sovereignty.

Unrestrained exercise of sovereignty can lead to extraterritorial impact,
as the rojadirecta case has shown. And this would favor the governments
having major operators on their soil. Sovereignty can kill sovereignty.

This is abroad discussion, but this notion - that emerged from a discussion
four years ago at the first EuroDIG in Strasbourg -  may be one of the new
principles needed for the cross-border infrastructure that the Internet is.

Best

Bertrand

On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Jovan Kurbalija <jovank at diplomacy.edu>wrote:

>  Well, we have innovation!  With the IGF in Bali, and ICANN on a cruise
> ship, we may have 'beach or floating governance'. Internet governance could
> be fun!
>
> I like the metaphor of the ship since it implies our common destiny. We
> are all passengers of ICANNia or ITUnia or...*?*       Metaphors are also
> useful to remove our tunnel vision and make us think more creatively. In
> another metaphor, I hope that Internetistan will resist Absurdistan (here
> is the map of this fast-growing country<http://diplo.smugmug.com/ILLUSTRATIONS/Posters-1/4464706_T4FW6r#%21i=1104113260&k=2GsD8hV&lb=1&s=A>).
>
>
> But back to the current reality. Unfortunately, the ICANN cruise ship
> won't solve the problem of internationalisation. 'Open sea' refers only to
> freedom of navigation. It does not deal with the status of the ship. All
> relations on the ship are regulated by the national law of the ship's flag.
> ICANNia has to be registered somewhere. One solution could be a flag of
> convenience such as Liberia or Panama.  What happens on the ICANNia is
> regulated by national law, with no major differences from any other
> land-based entity (company, organisation). Yes, ICANNia can sail in
> whatever direction it wants to sail, but the decision must be made by the
> captain according to the rules of the flag's state. Extrapolating from the
> role of the captain on the ship, the ICANNia would look like military unit.
> The cruise ship metaphor gets even more interesting  when we consider
> different classes of cabins, rescue operations, etc.
>
> These thoughts have taken me back to Hugo Grotius's book *Mare Liberum*that established the "open sea" concept four centuries ago as opposed to
> the idea of a *Mare Nostrum*. * *His relevance for our time is sobering.
> If we replace 'sea' with 'Internet' we could have the next book on the
> Internet. Grotius was a very interesting personality.* * Besides being
> one of the first international lawyers, he was one of the founders of the
> 'natural law' school of thought.  In addition, he wrote a lot about social
> contract (before Rousseau, Locke, and others). As a matter of fact, his
> social contract theory could be applicable to the Internet.
>
>  When it comes to the concept of open sea, Grotius had an interesting
> interplay with the political masters of his era.  He believed in open sea,
> but Dutch and British authorities quickly realised the usefulness of his
> doctrine. They had the biggest fleets and had ambitions to develop trade
> and colonial empires. Grotius provided them with the necessary doctrine or
> 'political software'.  However, Grotius always argued that 'open sea' needs
> rules and principles in order to be 'open'. Although it was
> counter-intuitive to the leaders of two growing maritime powers, he managed
> to convince them that it was in their best interest to 'tame' their
> comparative powers and ensure the sustainability of their empires beyond
> the 17th century. Everything else has written the history, which proved
> Grotius right. We can draw many parallels, with the necessary caution that
> historical analogies should be handled with care.
>
> While we are waiting for a new Grotius (or Godot), we should review how we
> debate Internet governance issues. Grotius was a great scholar who mastered
> the existing rules before he started changing them. We, on the other hand,
> use well-defined and developed concepts in a relaxed way. A few examples...
>
> As we saw, the frequently used metaphor of the open sea does not translate
> to an open Internet. In many respects, it can lead in the opposite
> direction (Internet Nostrum).
>
> Another example is the role of states' responsibility in the Internet era.
> This is a well-defined concept in international law. If we want states to
> be responsible for whatever is originating in their territories  (e.g.
> cyber-attacks, botnets),  we have to give them the tools to ensure their
> responsibility (mainly state control, regulation, and surveillance). Most
> writings on state responsibility start from the opposite assumption, i.e.
> the limited role of the state. With all the creativity and imagination in
> the world, we still cannot have it both ways.
>
> The most topical example of the need for evidence-based policy is the case
> of the Red Cross name/emblem at ICANN. There are very clear rules for the
> protection of the Red Cross name/emblem that were adopted some 100 years
> ago and have been followed, without  reservation, on national and
> international levels.  ICANN was right in protecting the Red Cross name but
> made the mistake of putting it together with organisations that do not
> enjoy the same status (the International Olympic Committee).
>
> Even if we want to change the rules in order to adjust to
> the specificities of the Internet era (if any), we have first to master
> them. I see here an important role for academic and civil society
> communities. If we had advised ICANN to evaluate the Red Cross and IOC
> submissions separately, we could have avoided a lot of policy confusion and
> wasted time.
>
> The GIGANET might consider the evidence-based policy research as the key
> theme for the next meeting?
>
> Regards, Jovan
>
>
> On 12/6/12 3:31 PM, McTim wrote:
>
> All,
>
>  If domiciling ICANN in a nation state is problematic, perhaps ICANN
> could buy this cruise ship as a HQ:
>
>  http://cruiseship.homestead.com/Cruise-Ship.html
>
>  It would help solve the problem of internationalisation, be a permanent
> host for ICANN meetings (2450 berths....saving hotel costs for all) and
> generate revenue intersessionally.  It's a 3-fer, plus it's a snip @~ 300
> million USD!!
>
>
>  --
> Cheers,
>
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
> indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>
>
> --
>
> ** **
>
> *Jovan Kurbalija, PhD*
>
> Director, DiploFoundation****
>
> Rue de Lausanne 56 *| *1202 Geneva *|** *Switzerland****
>
> *Tel.* +41 (0) 22 7410435 *| **Mobile.* +41 (0) 797884226****
>
> *Email: *jovank at diplomacy.edu  *| **Twitter:* @jovankurbalija ****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *The latest from Diplo:* today – this week – this month<http://www.diplomacy.edu/currently>
> *l* Conference on Innovation in Diplomacy (Malta, 19-20 November 2012)<http://www.diplomacy.edu/conferences/innovation>
> *l *new online courses <http://www.diplomacy.edu/courses>****
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>

-- 
____________________
Bertrand de La Chapelle
Internet & Jurisdiction Project Director, International Diplomatic Academy (
www.internetjurisdiction.net)
Member, ICANN Board of Directors
Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32

"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
Exupéry
("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20121207/74e2c47f/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t