An Independent Commission on the Information Society and Human Rights,
composed of highly qualified experts with a broad geographical
representation, should be established to monitor and assess practices
and policies on human rights and the information society. This is
particularly urgent, given the tendency in many countries - both North
and South - to sacrifice human rights in the name of "security".
Hi all,
You'll find below draft comments on the political chapeau and
operational part that Rikke and I have just developed. Please send us
any comment you may have on it, so that we can take them into account.
Cheers,
Meryem
Comments on the political chapeau and the operational part
Human Rights Caucus Contribution – February 22nd, 2005
With regards to the political chapeau
The human rights framework is mentioned in the opening paragraph of the
political chapeau but there is no further reference in the text. The
challenge we are facing in developing the information society is not
only to reaffirm existing international human rights treaties, but to
commit to enforce effective implementation of these standards at the
national level, by developing and using specific mechanisms to this
end.
The protection of some human rights was not adequately reflected during
the first phase, as the human rights caucus stressed on several
occasion. This is specially the case with regards to the right to
privacy, labor rights and the principle of non discrimination.
Likewise,
the caucus remains deeply concerned that the rule of law and the
regulatory framework are expected to "reflect national realities"
instead of being consistent with the legally binding obligations of
States according to the international human rights treaties they have
ratified. These deficits should be remedied and the issues included in
the appropriate sections of both the political chapeau and the
operational part.
We are furthermore concerned with the current formulation of the
opening
paragraph, that dissociates development from human rights, 12 years
after the Vienna Declaration, stating that human rights are universal,
indivisible, interrelated and interdependent, stressed that there is no
development without democracy, and no democracy without development.
The
objectives of the Millenium development goals and the realization of
human rights are interdependent, and should advance one another. Human
rights is not a sectoral issue, relevant to certain stakeholders only.
Human Rights are one of the essential purposes of the United Nations,
according to its Charter. The de facto status of human rights in a
given
national context is indicative for the level of development, freedoms,
democracy and the rule of law.
In the information society context, the full realization of human
rights,
such as freedom of expression, access to information and knowledge,
etc., is essential to education, citizen empowerment, democratic
participation, equal opportunities, cultural and linguistic diversity,
economic development and innovation, leading to overall social wealth.
Wherever human rights are violated, it has negative impact on the level
of development.
Extreme poverty and the massive disparities in access to information
and
to the means of communication are at the same time a cause and a
consequence of the unequal distribution of wealth in the world and
within countries. It severely diminishes the capabilities of people to
enjoy their human rights, specially the right to an adequate standard
of
living, and prevents economic and social development.
Moreover, even in a developed context, wherever surveillance,
monitoring
and censorship are exercised, wherever legislation and administrative
regulation leads to legal insecurity, and breaches of the rule of law,
it results in strong negative impact on Internet usage development and
user confidence, as well as on the economy of information society
services.
Human rights are therefore the standards for ensuring economic and
social
progress and for holding governments accountable to the commitments
they
have made. Human rights should be used as benchmarks with regard to
national implementation of the political goals.
We are also deeply concerned that the political chapeau only has a
brief
reference in the fourth paragraph to financial mechanisms and Internet
governance, while these are central issues of this second phase.
Financial resources control power and thereby affect human rights
realization. Human rights can be effectively strangled by lack of
funding. The way in which financial mechanisms are set up, controlled
and prioritized must comply with the objectives of participation of
citizens and local communities to public affairs and fair distribution
of resources, in order to enable and empower individuals and groups,
particularly those who are exposed, marginalized and vulnerable.
Internet governance has important impact on human rights and democracy.
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. Any decision resulting from WSIS on
Internet governance bodies and mechanisms must ensure that they comply
with human rights both through their composition and governing
structures and through the regular assessment of the substance of their
decisions.
Moreover, the current Internet topography, in terms of international
communication routes and of international traffic rate agreements, is
leading to unfair distribution of resources and massive inequalities
with respect to costs. The need for fair renegotiation of bilateral and
multilateral agreements should therefore be stressed as a mean to
promote the UN Millenium goals and to realize the commitments made in
the WSIS Declaration of Principles.
With regards to the operational part
While this second phase is aiming at making WSIS a Summit of
sustainable
solutions, we regret that the operational part lacks concrete targets,
goals and indicators to measure implementation at national and
international levels. After Geneva Summit, the human rights caucus
already stressed that beyond principles, there is the question of
enforcement: without effective implementation, the principles would
indeed stay without substance. The Geneva Plan of Action was already
devoid of any mechanism to advance the human rights agenda, and we are
deeply concerned that the operational part of this second phase does
not
show any tangible progress in this respect.
The human rights caucus has the following proposals:
An Independent Commission on the Information Society and Human Rights,
composed of highly qualified experts with a broad geographical
representation, should be established to monitor and assess practices
and policies on human rights and the information society. This is
particularly urgent, given the tendency in many countries - both North
and South - to sacrifice human rights in the name of "security".
Precise indicators should be defined, in order to evaluate the
realization of an information society protecting and promoting human
rights. Human right standards should be the benchmarks by which we
measure progress and by which we review state legislation and policies:
as benchmarks in relation to national implementation of the political
goals.
An initiative for human rights impact assessment for international
investment should be started. A human rights impact assessment provides
essential analytical background for any major investment. It can help
policy makers ensure investments strengthen rather than weaken human
rights; it can help business people make better long-term decisions; it
can help civil society groups obtain redress for peoples whose rights
have been violated. Just as any major business proposal must undergo an
environmental impact assessment, it is our belief that the impact of
such projects on human rights should also be assessed in a
comprehensive
way.
