[IRP] [charter] right to life liberty and security of person --- relevant for internet governance

Tue Oct 20 20:18:25 EEST 2009

Max,
I agree with you, but all the way....          ;-)

*There is no need to rewrite for the internet, any already existing
fundamental right....*

Best regards,

Jaco

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Max Senges <maxsenges at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Shaila
>>
>> Thanks for your input. I understand and support your point that the right
>> to life liberty and security of person is possibly the most fundamental
>> of them all, but is it really necessary to point out that that is also true
>> on the internet?
>>
>> In my view this right does not need an explanation regarding what it means
>> on the net. It is straight forward.
>>
>> It would be good to hear other opinions.
>>
>> Please pitch in
>>
>> Max
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 6:43 AM, shaila mistry <shailam at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Max
>>> I have several comments and have written them down in blue  under yours :
>>> please scroll down.
>>> I welcome your assistance and any one else s to work on this with me.
>>> I also have comments on privacy and the others.
>>> regards
>>> Shaila
>>>
>>>
>>> *Life is too short ....challenge the rules***
>>>
>>> *Forgive quickly ... love truly ...and tenderly***
>>>
>>> *Laugh constantly.....and never stop dreaming! ***
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From:* Max Senges <maxsenges at gmail.com>
>>> *To:* irp <Irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org>; Internet Rights
>>> Discussion Group <rights at lists.apc.org>; Annette. Muehlberg <
>>> annette.muehlberg at web.de>; Lisa Horner <lisa at global-partners.co.uk>;
>>> Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>; Emily Laidlaw <emily at laidlaw.eu>;
>>> Lauren Movius <lmovius at usc.edu>; "Bodle, Robert" <
>>> Robert_Bodle at mail.msj.edu>; shaila mistry <shailam at yahoo.com>; Jac sm
>>> Kee <jac at apcwomen.org>; Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>;
>>> wolfgang.benedek <wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at>; Fouad Bajwa <
>>> fouadbajwa at gmail.com>; Sami Ben Gharbia <SamiBenGharbia at gmail.com>;
>>> Ehsan Norouzi <ehsan.nrz at gmail.com>; Ashraf Mikhail <ami at humanrights.dk>;
>>> derechosyprincipiosparainternet at googlegroups.com
>>> *Sent:* Sun, October 18, 2009 2:05:29 PM
>>> *Subject:* [charter] last round before Section 1 milestone
>>>
>>> Hi folks
>>>
>>>
>>> As promised I have done a good overhaul of the draft. I have aimed at two
>>> things: (1) consistency & consolidation and (2) hypertextualizing
>>>
>>> Basically I tried to either flesh out important bullet points or drop
>>> less important ones.
>>>
>>> Secondly I added thematic subpages and started to set links to background
>>> info and references
>>>
>>> I would like to bring up the following more substantial editorial
>>> changes:
>>>
>>> A) Pursuing our aim to create a compact text that focuses on transposing
>>> Human Rights to the online sphere I deleted the rights where we did not see
>>> a need to elaborate on how they are effected and I propose to drop the
>>> following sections:
>>>
>>> Article 3 & 4: Security of person and Slavery: I think the points listed
>>> here are correct, but they are so broad and in fact acknowledge the paradox
>>> of clashing rights, but request all measures not to fall into this most
>>> complex trap... My feeling is that these articles are not very powerful as
>>> HR policy instruments, but rather water down our text. --- Shaila do you
>>> want to comment/agree/disagree
>>> The right to life liberty and security of person precedes any other
>>> right. Only after these rights are guaranteed can there be a discussion and
>>> relevance to assuring personal privacy, freedom of expression etc.  The
>>> matter or the body first then the thoughts and expression of rights. I can
>>> understand that since we all  have our personal  liberty assured , it is
>>> indeed hard to see that there are many who do not! These rights belong
>>> here since they are fundamental to existence. Unfortunately the Internet has
>>> become a vehicle and a catalyst in enabling abuse of these rights.  So
>>> we need strong statements to  indicate the sovereignty of this right.  So
>>> yes I do strongly feel they belong here and they do not water down our
>>> charter. In fact they strengthen them. I would like the wording to be
>>> stronger, but tried to keep it more neutral.  Can you or anyone else
>>> assist in this?
>>> shaila
>>>
>>>
>>> Article 11: Presumption of innocence: Again I think the points made make
>>> sense; but are we really missing an argument if they are not there?  Rebecca
>>> what do you think? Lisa i guess you originally drafted these points
>>>
>>> Article 17: Property: There is no new aspect to that right on the
>>> internet really, is there? Robert please agree or argue for your point.
>>>
>>> Article 18: Freedom of believe: Again I am not sure as to what degree the
>>> internet represents a new context for this right or wheter it simply applies
>>> to online expression as well.
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> B) The three BIG Rights when it comes to the Internet: Privacy, Freedom
>>> of Expression and (A2K) Article 27: Cultural participation have all received
>>> very good input and need to be consolidated now.
>>> Could someone from the drafters (or someone like Katiza who hasn't
>>> contributed her expertise yet) try to write a coherent and consolidated
>>> version?
>>>    - Privacy was collabowritten by: Jac, Rebecca, Max --- @ Katiza, Jan,
>>> could you contribute as well?      I have some comments
>>>    - Freedom of Expression was collabowritten by: Jac, Emily, Rebecca,
>>> Lauren, Max     I Have some comments
>>>    - Cultural participation & interests had input from Shaila, Marianne
>>> and Shaila  I have some comments
>>>
>>> ----------------------------
>>> NEXT STEPS
>>> I would hope that we can get Section 1 to its first milestone (= coherent
>>> version) really soon (before the end of the month). Our next steps then are:
>>> (i) to reach out to experts like Wolfgang Benedek, who said he would be
>>> happy to check that we do not speak legal gibberish and
>>> (ii) to reach out to our communities (local and thematic), spread the
>>> work, invite people to join us. (As Robert Guerra pointed out it would be
>>> particularly good to have more traditional Human Rights experts and
>>> activists participate)
>>>
>>> Another idea we could consider is if it might be feasible to make a
>>> Maker's style version of the charter for the IGF. Remember they use very
>>> basic "human-readable" catch phrases
>>> http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2006/12/the_makers_bill_of_rights.html
>>>
>>> Ok everybody THANK YOU very much for the energy and thought and time you
>>> invest in this effort.
>>>
>>> I think, especially with the prospect of having this hypertextual charter
>>> evolve over time, we are planting an important humanistic seed into the
>>> socio-technological soil that is the internet!
>>>
>>> Yours,
>>> max
>>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IRP mailing list
> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>
> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/listinfo.cgi/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org
>
>

-- 
Jaco Aizenman L.
Presidente
Registro de Activos Financieros - RAF
------------------------
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/pipermail/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org/attachments/20091020/a0126e3c/attachment-0001.htm>