[IRP] Notes from call on preamble.
Tue Dec 21 15:51:39 EET 2010
Yes - I was just outlining some of the members of the "HR community" that I've spoken to who are wary of so-called "new rights", as I thought that's what Marianne was asking. I wasn't trying to outline the sum of people who I think we are trying to reach, or indeed saying that they are more important than anyone else. I do think it's important to consider them though, given their influence at the international level. But I agree they're not our sole consideration.
Nb - Amnesty has been paying increasing attention to ESC rights of late, and stressing the indivisibility of rights. That's something we've all also been trying to do with the Charter.We're not trying to prioritise any group of rights or groups of people over others.
I think the Camden principles are a great example of the kind of doc that we're working on...an authoritative elaboration of principles that derive from human rights. It's been suggested as a model we could use for the Charter by a few people before. I think our approach is a bit more complex as we're also using rights language rather than just "principles", and are talking about "implementation principles".
RE the name of the Charter....I think we haven't really had enough time to discuss a name change properly, so I suggest we stick with "charter of human rights and principles for the Internet" for now. What do you think? I think Marianne's point about simplicity is an excellent one. But I also agree it needs to be accurate, and I like Bertrand's and Michael's suggestions too. Shall we discuss further as part of our consultations and thinking next year? ( I hope there will actually be opportunities where we can all get in a room together to make some of these important decisions, or at least we should work out how we're going to make them).
I think Dixie's going to send round a revised 1.1 draft later today with all of the changes we discussed over the last few weeks.
All the best,
More information about the IRP