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

[Anja Kovacs]

Dear all, 

I strongly agree with the points made initially by Shaila and supported
by others. It is in fact the right to access that I was also trying to
get at in my earlier questions regarding network neutrality-related
rights, but I had linked it too closely to a particular principle. The
very insightful comments here about the more general, crucial importance
of access made me wonder: should we actually address the right to
accessibility (also) under the right to life, liberty and security then?
At the moment, we have mostly interpreted article 3 in a negative
manner, speaking about possible violations.  But what are the positive
ways in which we can ensure the enjoyment of this right? Hasn't the
right to access become crucial in that sense? (we can then of course
still address accessibility in other places as well, including under
Freedom of Expression and the Universality of Rights)

I think we shouldn't, however, restrict the focus of a right to access
to our ability to participate as citizens of a country; we should also
be able to do so as global citizens, especially as governance
increasingly shifts to a global level. Already, differential access to
the Internet has exacerbated global inequalities enormously, and I am
quite sure that the limited access in developing countries affects, say,
participation from these regions (and particular groups within them) in
Internet governance quite considerably, meaning that governance regimes
evolve with developing country interests starkly underrepresented. That,
of course, is an additional argument than to address this issue under
life and liberty....

Thanks and all the best,
Anja




On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 10:45 +0100, Lisa Horner wrote:
> Thanks Olivier and Emily for your thoughts...I agree with them.
>  
> Just to elaborate a bit more on my perspective....
>  
> I think that a "right to the internet" should be a national civil
> right under national law just as, for example, UK citizens have a
> right to public broadcast content if they pay their licence fee.  This
> is becase provding access to these media are essential for national
> governments to fulfil their existing international human rights
> obligations. 
>  
> But access to the internet itself isn't a *human* right.  Human rights
> focus on the human rather than the medium.  Human rights can't be
> technology specific; they are human-focused.  Under the international
> HR framework, governments have to put in place whatever is necessary
> for us to be able to fully realise our dignity, humanity and human
> rights.  The internet is emerging as central to the realisation of
> rights, but there are also many other tools/platforms/structures that
> are appropriate.  A Charter would become meaningless if we listed all
> of them and declared a specific human right to all of them.  Which is
> why listing the core human rights, rather than the things necessary to
> achieve them, is more useful.  Talking about the specifics (e.g. the
> tools and platforms etc) is more suited to guidelines that interpret
> rights.
>  
> So I have no problem saying in the charter that the internet is
> necessary for realsing nearly all of our human rights in the modern
> age, and that governments should strive to provide internet access to
> all.  But declaring a human right to the internet I don't think is
> strategic or in line with the international HR framework.
>  
> As an example, I've pasted below the article relating to accessiblity
> in the UN convention on the rights of people with disabilities.  It's
> very much phrased in terms of interpreting human rights for people
> with disabilities. What do statees need to do to make sure that people
> with disabilities can exercise their human rights.  This is the kind
> of approach I think we should be taking  - elaborating what needs to
> be done to realise our rights in the internet age...(g) and (h) are
> especially relevant.
>  
> All the best,
> Lisa
>  
> Article 9 
> Accessibility 
> 1. To enable persons with disabilities to live independently and
> participate fully in all aspects of life, States Parties shall take
> appropriate measures to ensure to persons with disabilities access, on
> an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, to
> transportation, to information and communications, including
> information and communications technologies and systems, and to other
> facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban
> and in rural areas. These measures, which shall include the
> identification and elimination of obstacles and barriers to
> accessibility, shall apply to, inter alia: 
> 
> (a) Buildings, roads, transportation and other indoor and outdoor
> facilities, including schools, housing, medical facilities and
> workplaces; 
> 
> (b) Information, communications and other services, including
> electronic services and emergency services. 
> 
> 2. States Parties shall also take appropriate measures to: 
> 
> (a) Develop, promulgate and monitor the implementation of minimum
> standards and guidelines for the accessibility of facilities and
> services open or provided to the public; 
> 
> (b) Ensure that private entities that offer facilities and services
> which are open or provided to the public take into account all aspects
> of accessibility for persons with disabilities; 
> 
> (c) Provide training for stakeholders on accessibility issues facing
> persons with disabilities; 
> 
> (d) Provide in buildings and other facilities open to the public
> signage in Braille and in easy to read and understand forms; 
> 
> (e) Provide forms of live assistance and intermediaries, including
> guides, readers and professional sign language interpreters, to
> facilitate accessibility to buildings and other facilities open to the
> public; 
> 
> (f) Promote other appropriate forms of assistance and support to
> persons with disabilities to ensure their access to information; 
> 
> (g) Promote access for persons with disabilities to new information
> and communications technologies and systems, including the Internet; 
> 
> (h) Promote the design, development, production and distribution of
> accessible information and communications technologies and systems at
> an early stage, so that these technologies and systems become
> accessible at minimum cost. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond [mailto:ocl at gih.com]
> Sent: Wed 21/10/2009 10:17
> To: Lisa Horner; Emily Laidlaw; shaila mistry
> Cc: IRP
> Subject: Re: [IRP] [charter] right to life liberty and security of
> person---relevant for internet governance
> 
> 
> Hello Lisa,
>  
>         ----- Original Message ----- 
>         From: Lisa Horner 
>         To: Emily Laidlaw ; shaila mistry 
>         Cc: IRP 
>         Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:36 AM
>         Subject: Re: [IRP] [charter] right to life liberty and
>         security of person---relevant for internet governance
>         
>         
>         Hi
>          
>         I feel quite strongly that we can't talk about a right to the
>         internet at this stage.  Maybe we can use a strong version of
>         this charter as a basis for discussion about it a little later
>         down the line.  I'd really like to try and convene focused
>         discussions about sections of the charter and issues it's
>         raised at some point, maybe next year once we've got a solid
>         draft in place. But at the moment we're going to turn a large
>         propotion of the human rights community off the document if we
>         include new rights like that.
>          
> I think that there is a confusion about what consitutes a "right to
> the internet" and it is being amalgamated with the rights of
> expression etc.
> Whilst not pushing in one direction or another wrt inclusion or
> non-inclusion of this in the Charter, I note that many governments are
> putting essential citizen services online, in order to help citizens
> perform routine tasks more efficiently. Services like renewing ID
> cards, obtaining a birth certificate, paying taxes etc.
> What is not being said is that this setting up of new online services
> is having a detrimental effect with conventional services. It is
> getting increasingly hard to deal with paperwork by going physically
> to the administration involved. Writing conventional letters prompts
> an extended reply period. Obtaining someone on the telephone subjects
> you to extended waiting time with automated menus making you go around
> and around - and we are constantly reminded to save ourselves from the
> wait by performing our request online. This is caused by a reduction
> of employees performing those very tasks.
>  
> What I am trying to say is that in Western countries, we are
> witnessing the emergence of a dual-class system where those with
> Internet access will soon have a significant advantage over those
> without. The Internet is becoming central to our lives, and those
> without Internet access will be 2nd class citizens.
>  
> Bearing this in mind, should everybody have a right to the Internet?
>  
> Warm regards,
>  
> Olivier
>  
> -- 
> Olivier MJ Cr?pin-Leblond, PhD
> http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
> _______________________________________________
> IRP mailing list
> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/listinfo.cgi/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org
-- 
Dr. Anja Kovacs
Fellow
Centre for Internet and Society
T: +91 80 4092 6283
www.cis-india.org 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/pipermail/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org/attachments/20091021/90054f7f/attachment.pgp>