IRIS Actions / SMSI / Human Rights / List

[Précédent par date] [Index par date] [Suivant by date] [Précédent par thème] [Index par thème] [Suivant par thème]
[Previous by date] [Index by date] [Next by date] [Previous by thread] [Index by thread] [Next by thread]

HR and IG



hi all

Below a first draft statement on HR and IG that Meryem and I have developed this afternoon. Pls feel free to give us your comments and remarks.

Best Rikke


HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNET GOVERNANCE
Human Rights Caucus Contribution ? February 22nd, 2005

1. The civil society human rights caucus appreciates that a high level working group on internet governance issues has been established, following the Geneva Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action. We would like to express our support to the open and inclusive approach which has been taken so far by the working group. However, we wish to express our concerns with the following issues.

2. Internet governance, even narrowly understood as domain name management and technical standard setting, has important impact on human rights and democracy. The role and functions of domain name management and standards setting fora de facto involves and impacts human right issues. Whether defined broadly or narrowly, at least human right issues like privacy, freedom of expression, access to information, the public domain of knowledge, etc. are at stake in these functions. In addition, Internet protocols and standards have up to now been defined by a limited number of developed countries and ICANN, the current forum for domain name management is a private party, based on a contract by the US government. Any decision resulting from WSIS on Internet governance bodies and mechanisms must ensure that they are human rights compliant, both through their composition and governing structures and through the regular assessment of the substance of their decisions.

3. Moreover, the civil society human rights caucus is deeply concerned with the tendency to address every Internet related aspect within the framework of Internet governance. We recognize that a number of transnational issues related to Internet lack a global space for political discussions and agreement. However, current discussions on issues such as privacy, freedom of expression, prohibition against discrimination, access to information, intellectual property, illegal content, spam, infrastructure security etc., must be addressed within a broader human rights framework, in compliance with democracy and the rule of law. This is especially important since, in the information society context, a number of these rights are de facto threatened and in the defensive role at present.

4. As reaffirmed in the Geneva Declaration of principles, the development of the information society should be based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the UN Charter, protecting and upholding the universality, the indivisibility of all human rights, and their centrality to democracy, the rule of law and to development. The protection of human right standards is indeed the first responsibility of governments. This implies that governments are politically and legally committed to uphold human right standards within their jurisdiction and that they are accountable for human rights compliance, including before national and international courts. 

5. A main challenge with regard to Internet regulation relates to its transnational nature. International agreements have traditionally been based on the assumption of territorial jurisdiction, whereas Internet is a global communication forum. One of the results of the World Summit of the Information Society in Geneva was a growing acceptance of the Internet as a global common. This implies access for all countries to participate in policy decisions and enjoyment of this common good. It also implies state responsibility to ensure that Internet governance mechanisms are compliant with human right standards, and that there must be means to enforce them.

6. Holding governments responsible and accountable for human rights protection and enforcement does not exclude the active participation of private parties and civil society; however there must be clear divisions of responsibility. Technical management of the infrastructure must be grounded upon public policy decisions, while ensuring that the latter comply with human right standards and basic democratic principles of inclusiveness, transparency, checks and balances, and the rule of law.