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

[Emily Laidlaw]

This has been a very interesting and useful discussion.  I am short on
time, but wanted to quickly respond that perhaps we can see this work
on the charter where we examine the articles under the UDHR and flesh
them out for the Internet as principles, as a stepping stone or
exercise in the sense that once we work through it there might be
certain issues, such as this issue of accessibility, that might not be
adequately dealt with as a principle.  This might not mean it needs to
be set out as a new right (I am not going to way into that discussion
at the moment, though the discussion today on that topic has been very
useful I think), but might not be adequately addressed as an
interpretation of an existing right either. Access is an interesting
one because it consistently arises for the enjoyment of any of the
rights set out in the UDHR thus becoming a supe-principle of sorts.

Emily

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 12:48 PM, M.I.Franklin <M.I.Franklin at gold.ac.uk> wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> These issues are very complex to put it lightly. Here's how I understand it
> for the moment; transcribing (as we have been doing) the UDHR in writing a
> Charter on Internet-based rights and principles is distinct from inventing
> 'new' rights that pertain primarily to the internet, broadly defined.
> However, there are clearly issue-areas specific to the internet that either
> diverge from or amplify those rights enshrined in the UDHR. A difficult
> balancing act at the best of times as this recurring discussion indicates.
>
> However, Olivier's example about the technological imperative that is being
> put in place as more and more public services go online/become automated
> computerised services begs a question in these discussions about whether or
> not we should work up an explicit clause about a fundamental - universal -
> right to internet access, over and above freedom of speech etc (see Shaila
> and Anja).
>
> Whilst I empathise, the question that goes begging is whether the internet
> (again, however defined!) is at present *universally* available. It is not.
> That said, if the next call (IGF, WSIS< all the rest) is to 'connect the
> next billion' this recalls earlier tussles around ' universal access' in
> telephony (if I'm correct). That is as yet not the case either, at least not
> in the fullest sense of the term 'universal'.
>
> Back to the internet; the trend Olivier points to is a fact of life in
> richer regions (read OECD) which ipso facto have high ICT penetration. So,
> here, this charter may well be in the process of constructing new rights
> *despite* attempts not to be seen doing so (lisa's word of caution here). In
> other words, we could consider this case in terms of a pre-emptive strike
> (forgive the term) given that the UDHR was created in pre-internet times.
>
> Where does this leave the charter at present? For me it presents us with
> some strategic decisions for the short-term (e.g. Lisa, Emily) about
> sticking with what we know (UDHR vs. new rights). BUT, does this preclude us
> from thinking ahead in order to pre-empt exclusion and disenfranchisement
> that are already being put in place by virtue of the internet *not* being as
> yet universally available, let alone accessed/accessible (Anja, Shaila,
> Olivier)? I hope this does not preclude us from being ahead of the ball
> because, like it or not, some rights and principles may indeed need to be
> invented i.e. created anew.
>
> Hope that's clear because I'm still thinking the implications here through.
> Forgive me if it isn't.
>
> cheers
> MF
>
> --On 21 October 2009 12:52 +0200 Andrea Glorioso <andrea at digitalpolicy.it>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I apologise for ?chiming in so late ?in the discussion. ?I do hope I'm
>> using the correct medium for the following comment(s).
>>
>> Please also bear ?with my usual ?disclaimer, i.e. although I ?work for
>> the ? European ? Commission (dealing ? specifically ? with policies on
>> "Internet ? Governance", "Network ? ? ? ? and ?Information ?Security",
>> "Fundamental Rights on the Internet") here I am writing in my personal
>> capacity.
>>
>>>>>>> "max" == Max Senges <maxsenges at gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> ? ?> ? ? 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.
>>
>> My ?understanding ?of the process ?is that ?the ?first section of this
>> Charter is supposed to "elaborate on ?what [UDHR rights] *mean* in the
>> context of the internet".
>>
>> Therefore, it seems to me that the point ?is not whether the rights to
>> life, liberty ?and security (of person) apply ? on the Internet ?- the
>> answer is ?obviously yes. ?The ?real ?question seems to be ?how ?their
>> application/enforcement should be ?framed when related ?activities are
>> exercised on the Internet.
>>
>> If my understanding is correct, then I would ?like to stress that many
>> policy-making ?organisations ?have ? ? been framing ?the ? ?concept of
>> "[Internet] ?security" ?in a ?rather ? dichotomic way vis-?-vis ?other
>> fundamental ? rights. ? ? The usual ? "security ? vs ?privacy" (false)
>> opposition is but one example of this kind of approach.
>>
>> Stressing ?that "security" (on ?the Internet) is ?first and foremost a
>> tool to ?achieve a fundamental right ?makes it clear that any approach
>> on these ? matters must be ?duly ?substantiated (why ? do we need more
>> "security"?), ?appropriate to the goal ?at ?hand (do we really achieve
>> more security by centralising key ?decision-making powers on ?Internet
>> infrastructures?) and proportional (do ?we really want to ?monitor all
>> traffic of all Internet users to catch up the bad guys and protect the
>> good guys?). ?And so on.
>>
>> Incidentally, making a ? ?strong point that discourses ?on ?"security"
>> should be ?framed ?(at ? the very ?least ?*also*) ?in ?terms ?of ? the
>> fundamental right ?to security ?of persons ?makes ?the work of certain
>> officers in policy-making organisations much easier, believe me. ;)
>>
>> On a more substantive side, I would ?strongly argue against making any
>> specific example of ?security-related ?policies ?or problems ?in ? the
>> actual text. ?Technology changes very rapidly and what is the hysteria
>> of today becomes the fad of yesterday in the blink of an eye.
>>
>> Hope this is a useful contribution to the debate. ?I'm at disposal for
>> any clarification.
>>
>> Thanks, ciao,
>>
>> --
>> ? ? ?Andrea Glorioso || http://people.digitalpolicy.it/sama/cv/
>> ? ? ? ? ?M: +32-488-409-055 ? ? ? ? F: +39-051-930-31-133
>> ?* Le opinioni espresse in questa mail sono del tutto personali *
>> ? ? ?* The opinions expressed here are absolutely personal *
>>
>> ? ? ? ?"Constitutions represent the deliberate judgment of the
>> ? ? people as to the provisions and restraints which [...] will
>> ? ? ? ?secure to each citizen the greatest liberty and utmost
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? protection. They are rules proscribed by
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Philip sober to control Philip drunk."
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? David J. Brewer (1893)
>> ? ? ? An Independent Judiciary as the Salvation of the Nation
>
>
>
> Dr Marianne Franklin
> Reader/Convener of the Transnational Communications & Global Media Program
> Media & Communications
> Goldsmiths, University of London
> New Cross
> London SE14 6NW
> United Kingdom
> Tel (direct): #44 (0)207 919-7072
> Fax: #44 (0) 207 919-7616
> email: m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk
> http://www.goldsmiths.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin.php
> http://www.goldsmiths.ac.uk/pg/ma-transnational-communications-global-media.php
>
> _______________________________________________
> IRP mailing list
> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/listinfo.cgi/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org
>