[IRP] Notes to IRP workshop November 12th, IGF 2009

[Bodle, Robert]

Just a bit of notes from the Dynamic Coalition of Internet Rights and Principles workshop/meeting (please correct/amend/supplement!) (forgive me  if I didn?t get everyone?s names correctly or thoroughly)

Attendance: well attended (given the obstacles placed before us)

Introductions

Max (Chair for 2 years) Rights group, hope to continue as a multi-stakeholder participant

-provided a bit of background on IRP?s origins Bill of  Rights
group merged based on same missions and idea and framework ? to define an approach to IG from the position of HR and thus a consolidation of groups with the steering committee expanding with the main project being a document originally a Bill of Rights (now a Charter)

Lisa - commented on the multifaceted nature of working with other coalitions, for example last year there was a workshop with other DCs (freedom of expression, disability, ?) and workshop revealed that human rights provided a commonality connecting the coalitions.

DCs are a space to be free to work within coalitions and between them, and a free space to initiate projects ourselves.

The IRP is dominated still by civil society but all stakeholders are here from government and private sector (business) and this is very exciting to see.

Max ? There is lots of discussion about what Human Rights means definitions, we discussed values underlying human rights ? cultural, regional objectives, should we discuss UDHR only?

-policy implementation principles for IG ? how to use HR approach for good governance

-some comments on the Charter
-net is an important infrastructure, need to have a solid definition of Internet Rights online, and so there was a call for Bill of Rights for the Internet, governments didn?t like Bill of Rights (covenant - too legalistic) - so human rights provided a framework and a charter provided the appropriate instrument (less legalistic)
-which involves an interpretation of what rights are and transpose them into principles related to online context, to arrive at policy implementation instruments in that area.
-structure ? how to structure the document?
-work from the best existing document in the field  - APC Charter
-so . . . ACP agreed to do the next article together with IRP ? super happy to work with APC
-and it will be an ongoing discussion and learning process
-now is the time to think about how to progress, not an easy task, propose a way forward
-build a ?drafting committee of experts? to consolidate the draft
-recognition of experts in the room (Wolfgang Benedek, Meryem Marzouki, Rikke Frank J?rgensen<http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/author/default.asp?aid=31015> ?ed of Human Rights in the Global Information Society)
-and need to find more experts w/regional diversity [a balanced regional perspective]
-it will be good to enlarge this open process

Lisa- discussed the Charter in terms of uses (tool and platform) ? how can we use it as a driving factor for Bill of Rights, but other objectives: a tool used for civil society objectives, and as a platform for coalitions
-we need to layout how to translate HR into policy A) define the principles, and B) how to implement them together.
-to then be able to have serious discussions . . .

Max ? Important point about Charter not being a fixed document  but a hypertextual documents linking to other sources ? conceiving of the Charter as a hook for discussion so that different stakeholders can use it in various ways.
-writing a 1.0 version, then a 2.0 version later.

Brett from accessnow.org ? asks what the process for signing off, timeline, and infrastructure concerns.

Max ? the Charter is a knowledge hub, that will change. but perhaps there can be endorsement of Version 1.0 and then continue on with the hyper text (version 2.0). but there has already been solicitation of adopting the process if not the final drafted document as well.

APC ? discussion of the APC Charter and how it is translated into over 20 languages

Wolfgang ? Important to build on Geneva Convention, to build on existing Human Rights in Information Society
-concerns about too comprehensive, too long of a document
-1) smaller groups should consolidate the draft, and 2) then get endorsements
-Charter is a better approach
-we are now looking for experts from the South America . . .
-Johann (Minister of Foreign Affairs Dept. of International Law, Human Rights and Treaty Law) ? how text can be utilized by others fed into other treaty laws, influence and inspire! To take it further, strong need for this, the initiative is very timely

Max-we have one more month to get together and please post your ideas to the listserv irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org

Jorgensen ? important to have a point of reference in policy spaces, in various communities internationally. -issues framed by HR are uncommon and are needed.

Stafani Trumpy ? we have freedom of expression, also privacy, access, diversity, including almost everything . . . government is less active
IGF will be extended another 5 years which is important, there is time ahead of us to consolidate with the result being a charter
-difficulty involving all IGF constituencies
-goal to export the results in another forum to be accepted by the community at large
-IGF is not making decisions, so in the end [a Charter] will be a more concrete contribution, and the community at large will be grateful for it.

Meryem Marzouki ? Charter is ambitious but also discussed with some humility
-[Charter should be]practical and useful text providing guidelines to industry for their Terms of Service Agreements, to Human Rights NGO?s who are not here
-should refer to existing texts ? Geneva Declaration, UDHR, not only about rights that are directly related to the Internet but to social and economic rights (i.e. rights to a fair trial related to accountability and  ISPs). (final Charter shouldn?t lower existing rights).
-Methodology ? not starting from scratch, APC Charter as point of origin,
-Concept of different layers important [stratification approach to internet governance]: at the application layer, content layer, service layer, infrastructure, etc.
3 months for the first draft, to have consultation, feedback
Drafting group to end in June, then last round of comments, then suggestions to NGOs
With input from the consultation process.

Rebecca MacKinnon ? (GNI), Good idea to have a panel of experts to avoid unintentional consequences
-General community from developing countries whom government participants are in IG meetings
-Very important to have civil society from developing countries in this process, because it [The Charter] will be dismissed as Western or weighted by Western values and dismissed.
-important to over-compensate from Eastern countries with Human Rights backgrounds
--make an extra effort to bring more people into the community
-provide assistance to languages, provides a layer of complexity but should give some thought into how this might be done.
-recommendations should go to the list or to expert drafting committee?

Lisa - response -  to the list
Max- response - google translate might help with language issues.

Wolfgang- Latin American experts contacted, seeking the advice from individuals within UNESCO, Council of Europe, UN
-some concerns about transparency issues, does not want to face a ?black box? process
Max- seconded this concern

Frank La Rue ? commented on need for IRP to provide some technical assistance as well.

[Time runs out; close of meeting]

TBD!

-Robert

--
twitter.com/netrights
facebook.com/internetrightsandprinciples































________________________________
From: Emily Laidlaw <emily at laidlaw.eu>
To: Max Senges <maxsenges at gmail.com>
Cc: irp <Irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org>; shaila mistry <shailam at yahoo.com>; Lisa Horner <lisa at global-partners.co.uk>; "Bodle, Robert" <Robert_Bodle at mail.msj.edu>; Robert Guerra <guerra at freedomhouse.org>; wolfgang.benedek <wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at>; Jac sm Kee <jac at apcwomen.org>; Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>; Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>; Lauren Movius <lmovius at usc.edu>; Rebecca MacKinnon <rebecca.mackinnon at gmail.com>; Sylvia Caras <sylvia.caras at gmail.com>; Jan Schallab?ck <jan.schallaboeck at gmail.com>; Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>; Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com>; Lea Shaver <lea.bishop at gmail.com>; Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com>; Loreto Corredoira <loretoc at ccinf.ucm.es>; Jaco Aizenman <skorpio at gmail.com>
Sent: Tue, November 17, 2009 10:15:56 PM
Subject: Re: tomorrow 8am IRP workshop - sphinx room

Is anyone else trying to participate remotely and hearing nothing? I
thought maybe the meeting hadn't started, but I can now hear Lisa
sounding as though she is speaking about IRP..



2009/11/17 Max Senges <maxsenges at gmail.com<mailto:maxsenges at gmail.com>>:
> Hi everybody
>
> just wanted to remind you that we will have our IRP workshop tomorrow
> morning 8am
>
> remote participation via audio www.un.org/webcast/igf/<http://www.un.org/webcast/igf/> Room 6 and chat (i'll
> send the URL tomorrow morning)
>
> greetings
> max
>