A Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy Reform
Gisw2011_en
1. Global InformatIon
SocIety Watch 2011
Internet rIghts and democratIsatIon
Focus on freedom of expression and association online
AssociAtion for Progressive communicAtions (APc)
And HumAnist i nstitute for cooPerAtion witH develoPing countries (Hivos)
2. This edition of Global Information Society Watch is dedicated
to the people of the Arab revolutions whose courage
in the face of violence and repression reminded the world
that people working together for change have the power
to claim the rights they are entitled to.
3. Global Information Society Watch 2011
Steering committee Cover illustration
Anriette Esterhuysen (APC) Matías Bervejillo
Loe Schout (Hivos)
Proofreading
Coordinating committee
Stephanie Biscomb, Valerie Dee and Lori Nordstrom
Karen Banks (APC)
Monique Doppert (Hivos) Financial partners
Karen Higgs (APC) Humanist Institute for Cooperation with Developing Countries (Hivos)
Marjan Besuijen (Hivos) Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida)
Joy Liddicoat (APC)
Pablo Accuosto (APC) The views expressed in this publication are those of the individual
Valeria Betancourt (APC) authors and not necessarily those of APC or Hivos
Project coordinator
Karen Banks
Printed in Goa, India
Editor by Dog Ears Books & Printing
Alan Finlay
Global Information Society Watch
Assistant editor Published by APC and Hivos
Lori Nordstrom South Africa
2011
Publication production
Karen Higgs, Analía Lavin and Flavia Fascendini Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Licence
<creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/>
Some rights reserved.
Graphic design
monocromo ISSN: 2225-4625
info@monocromo.com.uy APC-201111-CIPP-R-EN-PDF-0105
Phone: +598 2 400 1685 ISBN: 978-92-95096-14-1
APC and Hivos would like to thank the Swedish
International Cooperation Agency (Sida) for its support
for Global Information Society Watch 2011.
4. Table of contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Internet charters and principles
United Nations Special Rapporteur on
the Promotion and Protection of the Right Internet charters and principles:
to Freedom of Opinion and Expression - frank la rue Trends and insights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Global Partners and Associates - dixie hawtin
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Electronic Frontier Foundation - jillian c. york
Mapping rights
Thematic reports
Mapping internet rights and freedom
Conceptualising accountability of expression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
and recourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 ict Development Associates - david souter
Association for Progressive Communications -
joy liddicoat
Country reports
Freedom of expression on the internet:
Implications for foreign policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
European University Institute - ben wagner Alan Finlay
Argentina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Towards a cyber security strategy Nodo TAU
for global civil society? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
The Canada Centre for Global Security Studies Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
and the Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs, EngageMedia Collective Inc.
University of Toronto - ron deibert Bangladesh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
VOICE
Internet intermediaries:
The new cyber police? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Benin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
CréACTION BENIN
European Digital Rights - joe mcnamee
Bolivia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
E-revolutions and cyber crackdowns: REDES Foundation
User-generated content and social
Bosnia and Herzegovina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
networking in protests in MENA oneworld-platform for southeast europe (owpsee)
and beyond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Justus Liebig University Giessen - alex comninos Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
GPoPAI-USP
The internet and social movements Bulgaria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
in North Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 BlueLink Foundation
Egyptian Blog for Human Rights - ramy raoof
Cameroon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
PROTEGE QV
Workers’ rights and the internet . . . . . . . . . . . 40
LaborNet - steve zeltzer China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Danwei
Sexuality and women’s rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Colombia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Association for Progressive Communications -
Colnodo
jac sm kee and jan moolman
Congo, Republic of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
AZUR Développement
Costa Rica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Sulá Batsú
6. Preface
Unlike any other medium, the internet enables offer, amongst other things, an analysis of how
individuals to seek, receive and impart informa- human rights are framed in the context of the
tion and ideas of all kinds instantaneously and internet, the progressive use of criminal law
inexpensively across national borders . Unlike to intimidate or censor the use of the inter-
any other technological development, it has net, the difficult role of intermediaries facing
created an interactive form of communication, increasing pressure to control content, and
which not only allows you to send information the importance of the internet to workers in
in one direction, but also to send information the support of global rights in the workplace .
in many directions and receive an immediate Some call for a change of perspective, as in the
response . The internet vastly increases the report on cyber security, where the necessity
capacity of individuals to enjoy their right to of civil society developing a security advocacy
freedom of opinion and expression, including strategy for the internet is argued . Without it,
access to information, which facilitates the ex- the levels of systems and controls, whether
ercise of other human rights, such as the right emanating from government or military super-
to education and research, the right to freedom powers, threaten to overwhelm what has over
of association and assembly, and the right to de- the years become the vanguard of freedom of
velopment and to protect the environment . The expression and offered new forms of free asso-
internet boosts economic, social and political ciation between people across the globe .
development, and contributes to the progress
of humankind as a whole; but it is especially an Many of these issues are pulled sharply into fo-
instrument that strengthens democracy by fa- cus at the country level in the country reports
cilitating citizen participation and transparency . that follow the thematic considerations . Each of
The internet is a “plaza pública” – a public place these country reports takes a particular “story”
where we can all participate . or event that illustrates the role of the internet in
social rights and civil resistance – whether posi-
The past year has been a difficult time globally: tive or negative, or both . Amongst other things,
whether the aftermath of the tsunami in Japan, they document torture in Indonesia, candlelight
unsteady global markets, post-election riots in vigils in South Korea, internet activism against
Nigeria, civil war in Libya and a military clamp- forgetting human rights atrocities in Peru, and
down in Syria . But there have been positive, and the rights of prisoners accessing the internet
equally challenging, developments in countries in Argentina . While the function and role of the
such as Tunisia and Egypt . Throughout the year internet in society remains debated, and neces-
people around the world have increasingly used sarily so, in many contexts these stories show
the internet to build support for human rights that to limit it unfairly will have a harmful im-
and social movements . This edition of Global pact on the rights of people . These stories show
Information Society Watch (GISWatch) offers that the internet has become pivotal in actions
timely commentary on the future of the internet aimed at the protection of human rights .
as an open and shared platform that everyone
has the right to access – to access content and GISWatch makes a valuable contribution to
to have access to connectivity and infrastructure . dialogue on freedom of expression, freedom of
association and democratisation and seeks to
Through the lens of freedom of expression, inspire and support collaborative approaches . n
freedom of association and democracy, the
Frank La Rue
thematic reports included here go to the heart
united nations special rapporteur on the
of the debates that will shape the future of the promotion and protection of the right to
internet and its impact on human rights . They freedom of opinion and expression
Preface / 9
7. Introduction
Jillian C. York rights (such as the necessity to keep public order) .
Electronic Frontier Foundation Similarly, the Charter also frames the freedom of as-
eff .org sembly or association online within the space of the
UDHR, including in its definition the right to “form,
join, meet or visit the website or network of an as-
Early visionaries imagined the internet as a border- sembly, group, or association for any reason” and
less world where the rule of law and the norms of noting that “access to assemblies and associations
the so-called physical world did not apply . Free ex- using ICTs [information and communications tech-
pression and free association were envisioned as nologies] must not be blocked or filtered .” The two
entitlements, a feature of cyberspace rather than aforementioned definitions comprehensively ad-
rights to be asserted . dress online rights as defined within the framework
These early conceptions quickly gave way to the of the UDHR .
realisation that, just as the internet was embraced But while the freedoms of expression and asso-
by people, so would it be controlled: by corpora- ciation are guaranteed by Articles 19 and 20 of the
tions, by policy makers, by governments, the latter UDHR, and by the individual constitutions of many
of which began asserting control over the internet of the world’s nation-states, their application online
early on, enacting borders to cyberspace and pre- has proved troublesome for even the most demo-
venting the free flow of information, not unlike the cratic of governments .
physical borders that prevent free movement be- The internet is unique, both structurally and
tween nations . practically . A medium unlike any other, it enables in-
For more than a decade, academics and activists dividuals to cross borders in an instant, to seek and
have dissected and debated the various challenges share information rapidly and at little cost . But just
to a free and open net . But the use of digital tools as it provides a unique means of communication, so
in the uprisings in the Middle East and North Af- too does it present unique challenges for regulators
rica, as well as the subsequent restrictions placed who, so far, have relied upon outmoded legislation
on them by governments, have inspired new pub- to regulate the digital space .
lic discourse on the subject, bringing to light the For example, defamation laws in Turkey have
importance of and highlighting new challenges to led to an environment where any individual or or-
internet freedom . ganisation can all too easily petition a judge to
In Tunisia and in Egypt, the ability to organise block an allegedly defamatory website, thereby si-
and share information online proved vital to many lencing what may very well be legitimate criticism .
in organising the revolutions that eventually led Similarly, in Tunisia, not long after the country’s
to the downfall of both countries’ regimes . There, decade-long censorship of the internet ended, a
and in Syria, Viet Nam, Iran, the Occupied Pal- group of judges successfully petitioned the court to
estinian Territories, and beyond, the videos and order the Tunisian Internet Agency to block access
images disseminated from protests have demon- to a large swath of pornographic websites in the in-
strated precisely why online freedom must be a terest of “morality” .
policy imperative . The desire to restrict access to “adult content”
The Charter of Human Rights and Principles exemplifies the challenges of enforcing existing
for the Internet,1 developed by the Internet Rights age restrictions on online content . Where a maga-
and Principles Coalition, defines online freedom zine can be restricted for sale to minors or hidden
of expression to include the freedom to protest, in opaque packaging, and a television programme
freedom from censorship, the right to information, or film can come with age-appropriate warnings,
the freedom of the media, and the freedom from online content is not so easily restricted . Instead,
hate speech . Framed by Article 19 of the Universal the most oft-used method of restriction, technical
Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the Charter filtering, cannot differentiate between the adult
recognises certain legal restrictions placed on such and child user and therefore blocks access to con-
tent from all . In any scenario, filtering tends to be
1 internetrightsandprinciples .org/node/367 overbroad and expensive, but is also fallible, and
10 / Global Information Society Watch
8. in most cases easily circumvented by commercially States have on numerous occasions relied upon
available tools . intermediaries to undertake censorship on their be-
Blocking websites is not the only means of re- half, such as in the case of South Korea, where the
stricting access: in Iran and in Syria, for example, Korea Communications Standard Commission – a
authorities have slowed bandwidth to a crawl, semi-private initiative – has been developed to regu-
limiting the ability of users to upload or download late online content, or in the United Kingdom (UK),
content such as videos or images . Several coun- where the Internet Watch Foundation, an opaque
tries, including South Korea, have attempted to non-governmental agency, determines a blacklist of
control access to certain content, or to track us- child sexual abuse websites, which is in turn used by
ers by requiring government identification to use internet service providers (ISPs) and governmental
certain websites or to enter cybercafés . Government- regulators (as was the case with Australia’s proposed
enabled or sponsored attacks on infrastructure or filtering scheme) . Currently, several Australian ISPs
individual websites have become increasingly com- have agreed to voluntarily filter illegal content in lieu
mon . And more recently, governments aware of the of filtering legislation, raising questions about the
internet’s organising potential have taken to imple- role of ISPs in moderating content . These issues are
menting “just-in-time” blocking – limiting access to at the core of the debate around network neutral-
sites during specific periods of election or protest, ity, a policy framework which has yet to be widely
or worse, arresting bloggers and social media users adopted .
or shutting down the internet entirely as has oc- Companies that operate in foreign countries can
curred in Egypt, Libya and Syria . impose or be complicit in limits to free expression .
These various forms of restriction leverage the Companies are obliged to abide by the rules of their
ability of governments to censor and discredit un- host country, which, in countries where restrictions
wanted speech, while fears of “cyberwar” make it to online content are the norm, results in aiding
easy for governments to justify political repression, that country’s censorship . Between 2006 and 2010,
blocking access to opposition content or arresting Google censored its search results at the behest of
bloggers under terrorism legislation . A genuine the Chinese government, while Microsoft contin-
need for digital security has pushed governments to ues to do so . And several companies – including
develop strategies to identify and track down actual US companies Cisco and SmartFilter, and Canadian
criminals; these methods are in turn used to crack company Netsweeper – allow their filtering soft-
down on political dissidents and others . Similarly, ware to be used by foreign governments .
efforts to enforce copyright have led to chilling ef- These concerns also extend to platforms that
fects, such as in the United States (US) where, in host user-generated content . Across the Arab world
an effort to crack down on copyright infringement, and beyond, the use of social platforms to organise
the intellectual property wing of the Immigrations and disseminate information has garnered praise
and Customs Enforcement seized dozens of domain for sites like Facebook and Twitter . But while these
names under the guise of “consumer protection” . platforms offer seemingly open spaces for dis-
Similarly, proposals such as France’s HADOPI course, the policies and practices of these privately
– which would terminate the internet access of sub- owned platforms often result in content restrictions
scribers accused three times of (illegal) file sharing stricter than those applied by government censors,
– silence speech while doing little to solve the prob- presenting a very real threat to free expression .
lem they are intended to combat . Take, for example, the case of Wael Ghonim, the
Lawmakers have also found ways to restrict ac- Egyptian Google executive who created the “We
cess to certain content from users outside of their Are All Khaled Said” Facebook page, a core site for
countries using what is known as geolocational organising the protests . Several months prior to
IP blocking . This tactic has a variety of uses, from the uprising, the page was taken down, a result of
media content hosts like Netflix and Hulu blocking Facebook policies that require users to utilise a real
users outside of the US in compliance with copy- name on the service, and was only reinstated when
right schemes, to US companies blocking access to another, identified, user stepped in to take Ghon-
users in sanctioned countries like Syria and Iran . im’s place . Similarly, Facebook recently removed a
Free expression online is challenged not only by page calling for a third intifada in Palestine, follow-
governments, but also by private entities . Though ing public objections and numerous user reports .
censorship is, by definition, the suppression of pub- Other platforms have acted similarly, removing con-
lic communications, the right to free expression is tent when it violates their proprietary terms of use .
increasingly challenged by intermediaries, whether While filtering and other means of restriction
by their own volition or at the behest of governments . affect the ability to access content, access to the
Introduction / 11
9. physical and technical infrastructure required to The challenges to an open internet are decid-
connect to the internet can also be used by gov- edly complex . And with the fragmentation of the
ernments as a means of restricting the free flow internet aided not only by authoritarian regimes,
of information and limiting individuals’ ability to but also democratically elected governments, ISPs,
associate and organise . While in many cases, low user-generated content platforms, and other cor-
internet penetration is a sign of economic or infra- porate entities, the solutions to creating an open
structural challenges, it can also be an intentional internet are equally, if not more, complex than the
strategy by governments attempting to restrict citi- problems .
zens from accessing information or developing civil Censorship does not exist in a vacuum; for every
society . Though this strategy is best exemplified by step closer to freedom, there is another step back,
Cuba and North Korea – where the majority of citi- as governments learn from one another and imple-
zens are barred entirely from accessing the internet ment new “solutions” for limiting free expression .
– dozens of countries with the capability to do so At the top level lies the simplest yet most dif-
have slowed or stifled the infrastructural develop- ficult solution: convincing governments of the value
ment necessary to expand access . of a free internet . The ideals of an open internet are
These various forms of control have led to what often in direct conflict with the interests of policy
scholars have referred to as the “Balkanisation” of makers, whether in debating network neutrality in
the internet, whereby national boundaries are ap- the US or in the current proposal to erect a China-
plied to the internet through these various means style firewall in Iran .
of control . In 2010, the OpenNet Initiative estimated Solutions to the latter problem abound, but
that more than half a billion (or about 32%) of the often act as mere bandages, offering a fallible so-
world’s internet users experience some form of na- lution to a vast and ever-developing problem . The
tional-level content restriction online . That number US and other governments have poured money into
is undoubtedly increasing: in recent months, vari- circumvention technology, which can be effective
ous governments across the globe have taken new in getting around internet censorship, but simply
steps to restrict access to content . Egypt, which furthers the cat-and-mouse game between govern-
had blocked websites minimally and only sporadi- ments and tool developers, the former blocking the
cally, took an enormous step backward when it shut latter as the developers attempt to keep up . Mesh
down the internet for a week during the protests . networking has, of late, also become a strong con-
Libya, which prior to 2011 filtered only selectively, tender for solving the dual problems of censorship
has barred access for most of its population since and access, with several nascent projects receiving
February . Iran has recently announced plans to attention – and funding – from government entities .
withdraw from the global internet, creating essen- Trade restrictions have been proposed to curb
tially an intranet inside the country . And even in internet censorship; notably, in 2010, Google pro-
states where access remains low – such as in Ethio- posed the idea of stricter trade governance as a
pia, where internet penetration hovers around 0 .5% means to prevent or lessen restrictions placed by
– governments fearing the democratising power of governments on internet access . At the same time,
the internet are preemptively putting additional re- the Global Network Initiative, a multi-stakeholder
strictions in place . As of 2011, more than 45 states organisation comprised of academics, activists,
have placed restrictions on online content . corporations and NGOs, is working with companies
When a country restricts the free flow of infor- to guide them toward better policies around privacy
mation online, it impacts not only the citizens of and free expression online .
that country, but reduces the value of the internet But while attainment of these ideals may at
for all of its users and stakeholders . Just as Chi- times seem nearly impossible, the costs of not
na’s extensive filtering of online content prevents fighting for them are too great . It is therefore imper-
Chinese users from reaching the BBC, the BBC is ative that we – the users, the citizens – continue to
prevented from doing business in China; and just as push for better choices at the hands of governments
Chinese users cannot access Facebook, Facebook and corporations, and keep fighting for the equally
users from across the world cannot interact with the necessary freedoms of expression and association
Chinese populace . in this most unique of spaces . n
12 / Global Information Society Watch
11. Conceptualising accountability and recourse
Joy Liddicoat Rights .6 Other international human rights standards
Association for Progressive Communications (APC) followed, including the Convention against Torture
www .apc .org and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
or Punishment .7
Introduction Accountability and remedies
The modern foundations of international human When the UDHR was being negotiated, litigation
rights rest on the Universal Declaration of Human was not seen as the appropriate way to seek rem-
Rights (UDHR) and the Charter of the United Na- edies or accountability between nations (nor was
tions (UN) .1 The UDHR affirmed human rights are there an international court system) . New forums
universal, inalienable and interconnected . The hu- were established, including the Security Council,
man rights framework recognises both the right of the Human Rights Committee and, more recently,
states to govern and the duty of states to respect, the Human Rights Council . Accountability to these
protect and promote human rights . The global forums was primarily by way of periodic report-
transformation of human rights from moral or philo- ing . Once a state had ratified a treaty (such as the
sophical imperatives into a framework of rights that ICCPR) it agreed to periodically report on imple-
are legally recognised between nations continued mentation, but ratification was also permitted with
into the 21st century, but this basic framework has reservations . Some treaties adopted complaint pro-
been reaffirmed by UN member states and remains cedures for individual complaints (which are known
the foundation of human rights today .2 The inter- as optional protocols), but states are not obliged to
net has been used to create new spaces in which submit to these . Each treaty has different standards
human rights can be exercised and new spaces in for accountability . For example, states are obliged
which rights violations can take place . This report to implement economic, cultural and social rights
looks at human rights concepts, the internet and as resources allow, through a system known as
accountability mechanisms for internet-related hu- “progressive realisation” . Civil and political rights,
man rights violations .3 on the other hand, must be implemented immedi-
ately and some, such as freedom from torture, can
The human rights framework
never be suspended or limited, even in emergency
The UDHR is not legally binding but has a power- situations .
ful moral force among UN member states . Binding The premise underlying these forms of ac-
standards have been developed, including the In- countability is that states, as equal members of
ternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights the international community of nations, will sub-
(ICCPR)4 and the International Covenant on Eco- ject their conduct to the scrutiny of other states .
nomic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) .5 In doing so states also agree to abide by recom-
Together with the UDHR, these two standards have mendations or take into account observations
become known as the International Bill of Human made about matters within their own borders .
States therefore agree to be publicly accountable
1 The United Nations officially came into existence after ratification for their human rights performance . This was a
of the Charter on 24 October 1945 .
2 The 1993 Vienna World Conference on Human Rights reaffirmed
major transformation in the international commu-
that human rights are indivisible and interrelated and that no nity of states .
right is superior to another . UN General Assembly (1993) Vienna
Declaration and Programme of Action, Article 5 . www .unhchr .ch/
huridocda/huridoca .nsf/(symbol)/a .conf .157 .23 .en
3 “Accountability mechanisms” range from international 6 Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (1996) Fact
mechanisms, to litigation, to community action and lawful forms of Sheet No. 2 (Rev. 1) The International Bill of Human Rights, United
protest . Nations, Geneva . www .ohchr .org/Documents/Publications/
4 The ICCPR includes rights related to the right to vote, freedom of FactSheet2Rev .1en .pdf
expression, freedom of association, and the rights to a fair trial and 7 Others include the International Convention on the Elimination
due process . of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), the Convention on
5 The ICESCR includes rights related to the right to health, the right the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
to education, the right to an adequate standard of living, and the (CEDAW), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCROC), and
right to social security . the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) .
Thematic reports / 15
12. In practice, the effectiveness of these account- • Engagement with special procedures of the UN
ability mechanisms varies widely . Some treaty (for example, the Special Rapporteurs on Free-
body processes8 are seen as very ineffective: the dom of Opinion and Expression, Freedom of
reporting processes are cumbersome, lengthy and Association and Human Rights Defenders)
time consuming for states and civil society groups • State peer review in the Universal Periodic Re-
alike . Some states simply do not file their periodic view process
reports . For these and other reasons the treaty body
processes are currently being reviewed .9 Other • Formal complaints to regional mechanisms, for
mechanisms, such as the Universal Periodic Review, example, the European Court of Human Rights,
are seen as much more effective . the Inter-American Court of Human Rights or the
This variability has implications for civil society African Court on Human and People’s Rights
groups, which must strategise carefully about the • Complaints to or investigations by ombudsper-
use of different or multiple mechanisms depend- sons or national human rights institutions
ing on a number of factors, including the issue, and
• Litigation (where national constitutions allow
whether the context is national or local . Multiple
for this or where international standards have
mechanisms might be used at the same time, over
been incorporated into domestic law) .
time, or not at all, depending on the particular is-
sues and context . As human rights violations in relation to the internet
The human rights framework also has limitations . increase,10 questions arise about accountability and
As a forum of governments the UN is necessarily in- remedies . The implications for internet-related hu-
fused with politics . Agreed human rights standards are, man rights violations cannot be considered without
generally, the product of the best possible political first looking at the internet-related forums in the UN .
consensus . The result is often a minimum standard:
the lowest common denominator of agreement . The Human rights and the internet at the UN
international human rights system is still evolving, Despite the centrality of human rights to the crea-
with the UN’s mandate under constant scrutiny, tion of the UN, the World Summit on the Information
and its utility questioned in the face of the mod- Society (WSIS),11 the WSIS Geneva Declaration of
ern horrors of human rights violations . In addition, Principles12 and the Internet Governance Forum
the framework itself is not static . The UN system is (IGF),13 discussions about accountability for hu-
evolving with new processes such as the Universal man rights violations remain limited . Tensions have
Periodic Review providing new opportunities for emerged given the openness of the internet, which
scrutiny and leadership . While changes may be posi- has been both a factor in its success and a point of
tive, these take time to implement, requiring civil political contention in debates about internet govern-
society organisations (CSOs) to develop or enhance ance .14 Early adopters of the internet and information
capacity to engage and use them effectively while and communications technologies (ICTs) reached
also trying to advance their issues and concerns . for rights as a way to navigate these tensions by
Yet the UN – and the Human Rights Council in articulating their freedom to use and create online
particular – remains the central global human rights spaces, to assert their rights to communicate and
forum . Opportunities for recourse against states, share information, and to resist state or government
as ways to hold them accountable for human rights interference with rights to privacy .15 The simple ap-
violations, must be considered taking into account plication of existing human rights standards was the
both strengths and limitations of the international
human rights framework . And today there are more
10 La Rue, F . (2011) Report of the Special Rapporteur on the
processes for state accountability for human rights promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and
violations than have ever existed . These include: expression, 26 April, A/HRC/17/27, p . 8-15 .
11 World Summit on the Information Society, United Nations
• Scrutiny by treaty bodies and International Telecommunication Union (2005) WSIS
Outcome Documents . www .itu .int/wsis/documents/doc_multi .
• Complaints to UN bodies under optional protocols asp?lang=en&id=2316|0
12 Article 19 of the UDHR is cited in paragraph 4 of the Geneva
Declaration of Principles (2003) .
13 www .intgovforum .org
8 Treaty body processes refers to the various mechanisms for 14 Cavalli, O . (2010) Openness: Protecting Internet Freedoms, in
oversight of implementation of treaties; for example, the Drake, W . J . (ed) Internet Governance: Creating Opportunities for
Committee for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination All, United Nations, New York, p . 15 .
Against Women oversees the CEDAW convention and the Human 15 One of the more famous examples was John Perry Barlow’s
Rights Committee oversees the ICCPR . Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace (February 1996) .
9 www2 .ohchr .org/english/bodies/HRTD/index .htm projects .eff .org/~barlow/Declaration-Final .html
16 / Global Information Society Watch
13. starting point for civil society groups and, building on • The complexity of the internet ecosystem (for
the work of the People’s Communication Charter, the example, no single point of governance and
Association for Progressive Communications (APC) network operation, diverse standard-setting
developed the first Internet Rights Charter in 2001- systems, the role of internet intermediaries and
2002 (subsequently updated in 2006) .16 In 2010, the platform providers, and so on) and the various
Dynamic Coalition on Internet Rights and Principles connection points of that ecosystem with the
released a Charter of Internet Rights and Principles human rights ecosystem (or lack of connection
and, in 2011, a more condensed set of ten principles .17 points) .
But further elaboration and clear explanation of • While there may be a single international hu-
how existing human rights standards apply seemed man rights standard (for example, on freedom
necessary . New charters and statements of princi- of expression) there is no single way and no sin-
ples have emerged in regional bodies (such as the gle correct way to give effect to that standard .
Council of Europe) and nationally (for example, in
Estonia and Finland) .18 It is not yet clear if a new • The diverse ways that human rights issues arise;
“Super Charter” will emerge or if a new model na- for example, from privacy and surveillance, to
tional law will be developed . the ICT production line (conflict minerals, the
The internet-related aspects of freedom of ex- rights of workers), to content filtering, content
pression and freedom of association have received blocking and harassment, arrest and detention
some scrutiny in UN human rights mechanisms . of online human rights activists .
The 2011 annual report of the Special Rapporteur • Human rights violations may involve multiple
on Freedom of Opinion and Expression19 was the and intersecting rights across different treaties
first time the Human Rights Council had considered and affect groups differently (such as women,
a report specifically focused on human rights and sexual and gender minorities, people with dis-
the internet . In 2010, the Human Rights Committee abilities, or racial and cultural minorities) .
began a review of General Comment 34 (a key docu-
• The application of human rights standards to
ment which the Committee uses to interpret Article
the fast-changing forms of connectivity (mo-
19 of the ICCPR) and released its preliminary report
bile is outpacing other forms of connectivity, for
in May 2011 .20 The new general comment includes
instance) .22
specific reference to “electronic and internet-based
modes of expression” .21 This will strengthen the • The nebulous legal environments of many coun-
mechanisms for recourse and reporting internet- tries, including absence of the rule of law (or
related violations of freedom of expression under ineffective legal systems), lack of legislation
Article 19 by requiring states to include these in and constitutional protections or, conversely,
their reports . The final revised comment was re- over-regulation and extensive direct or indirect
leased in June 2011 and should be available for use censorship .23
in periodic reporting and other accountability • The diverse human rights situations in diverse
mechanisms by early 2012 . countries, especially within and between devel-
These various initiatives are welcome, but more oped and developing countries .
work needs to be done to ensure the internet is a
cross-cutting issue within all treaty bodies and hu- • The actual and perceived limitations of human
man rights mechanisms . The topic of human rights, rights remedies where the state violates human
the internet and accountability mechanisms re- rights or where non-state actors can act with
mains complex for a variety of reasons, including: impunity .
• The frequent need to obtain remedy or recourse
quickly and the slow and cumbersome nature of
16 www .apc .org/en/node/5677
most legal processes .
17 www .internetrightsandprinciples .org
18 In relation to Estonia, see Woodard, C . (2003) Estonia, where being
wired is a human right, Christian Science Monitor, 1 July . In relation 22 See, for example, Southwood, R . (2011) Policy and regulatory
to Finland, see Ministry of Transport and Communications (2009) issues in the mobile internet, APC . www .apc .org/en/node/12433;
732/2009, Decree of the Ministry of Transport and Communications Horner, L . (2011) A human rights approach to the mobile internet,
on the minimum rate of a functional Internet access as a universal APC . www .apc .org/en/node/12431; and Comninos, A . (2011)
service . www .finlex .fi/en/laki/kaannokset/2009/en20090732 Twitter revolutions and cyber-crackdowns: User-generated content
19 La Rue (2011) op . cit . and social networking in the Arab Spring and beyond, APC . www .
20 Human Rights Committee (2011) Draft General Comment No. 34 apc .org/en/node/12432
(upon completion of the first reading by the Human Rights Council, 23 For example, in relation to Turkey, see Johnson, G . (2011)
3 May, CCPR/C/GC/34/CRP .6 . Censorship Threatens Turkey’s Accession to EU, unpublished
21 Ibid ., para 11 . research paper .
Thematic reports / 17
14. • The cost of litigation and the lack of access to judicial and other officers adequately understand
this remedy for many individuals and groups . internet-related human rights issues .
• The geopolitics and how these play out in vari- New avenues for global recourse and account-
ous forums . ability mechanisms are emerging . The Special
Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression has empha-
• The multiple and sometimes conflicting mecha- sised the need for effective remedies, including
nisms for remedy within countries (for example, in rights of appeal .30 In addition, he noted that the
relation to content censorship, the intersections internet has created more avenues for use of tra-
of defamation law, constitutional protections ditional remedies including the right of reply,
where these exist, and criminal or civil legislation publishing corrections and issuing public apolo-
for different types of material) . gies .31 In one defamation case, for example, the
settlement agreement included the defendant
What future for accountability mechanisms? apologising 100 times, every half hour over three
Given these complexities it is perhaps no surprise days, to more than 4,200 followers of his Twitter
that those discussing internet rights charters and account .32
principles have steered away from creating new
accountability mechanisms – none appear to con- A rights-based approach to the internet
tain new complaints procedures . The question is, and human rights
can the existing human rights framework provide The rights-based approach, or human rights ap-
adequate accountability mechanisms for internet- proach as it is also known, was developed as a
related human rights violations? practical way to implement human rights standards .
The answer is unclear . A mixed picture emerges The rights-based approach was first articulated in
from current practice . Some CSOs have been active the UN in 2002, when the Office of the UN High Com-
in the Universal Periodic Review process .24 Regional missioner for Human Rights convened an ad hoc
human rights mechanisms (such as the European expert committee on biotechnology . The committee
Court of Human Rights) are receiving increasing noted this was a new and emerging area of human
numbers of complaints25 together with strategic rights, with no specific human rights standards . To
interventions in litigation by CSOs .26 But no com- overcome this difficulty the committee decided to
plaints have been received by the African Special rely on a “rights-based approach” for its task, indi-
Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression in relation cating that such an approach should:33
to freedom of expression and the internet .27 There
have been few complaints to national human rights • Emphasise the participation of individuals in
institutions, possibly because these have not yet decision making
adequately considered how to deal with internet- • Introduce accountability for actions and deci-
related complaints .28 Civil litigation remains a pri- sions, which can allow individuals to complain
mary way to gain recourse in many countries .29 about decisions affecting them adversely
More research is needed to develop a better
• Seek non-discrimination of all individuals
global picture of the use of these various mecha-
through the equal application of rights and obli-
nisms and monitor change . For example, some
gations to all individuals
mechanisms may be best suited to certain types of
complaints and offer different remedies . Capacity • Empower individuals by allowing them to use
building also may be needed to support civil society rights as a leverage for action and legitimise
advocacy and strengthen the mechanisms to ensure their voice in decision making
• Link decision making at every level to the agreed
24 Universal Periodic Review (UPR), Thailand: Joint CSO Submission human rights norms at the international level as
to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (March
2010), endorsed in whole or in part by 92 Thai organisations .
set out in the various human rights covenants
25 For a summary of recent European Court of Human Rights cases in and treaties .
relation to the internet and human rights see the European Court
of Human Rights “New Technologies Fact Sheet” (May 2011) .
26 For example, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Privacy
International . 30 La Rue (2011) op . cit ., para 47 .
27 Advocate Pansy Tsakula, personal communication to APC, 2011 . 31 Ibid ., para 27 .
28 See, for example, New Zealand Human Rights Commission (2010) 32 www .thejournal .ie/malaysian-man-apologises-via-100-tweets-in-
Roundtable on Human Rights and the Internet. www .hrc .co .nz defamation-settlement-147842-Jun2011
29 Kelly, S . and Cook, S . (eds) (2011) Freedom on the Net 2011: A 33 High Commissioner for Human Rights (2002) Report of the
global assessment of the internet and digital media, Freedom High Commissioner’s Expert Group on Human Rights and
House, Washington . Biotechnology: Conclusions, OHCHR, Geneva, para 21 .
18 / Global Information Society Watch
15. This approach has been extended into a wide range Conclusion
of areas, particulary those where no specific human There are more opportunities at global levels for re-
rights standards seem to apply . The approach is course for human rights violations than ever before .
increasingly being used to critique internet regula- Yet these appear largely underutilised in relation
tions on access to the internet, privacy, filtering34 to the internet and human rights . Diverse and com-
and the mobile internet .35 The UN Special Repre- plex factors interact to create this situation and it
sentative on Business and Human Rights has also is difficult for CSOs to develop effective strategies .
drawn on the rights-based approach to consider lia- At the same time, new human rights standards and
bility of transnational corporations for human rights mechanisms are emerging in relation to freedom
violations . The resulting framework highlights the of expression and freedom of association, creating
need for access to effective remedies, both judicial new opportunities for recourse . Taking a rights-
and non-judicial .36 based approach to the internet and human rights
There is scope to use this approach in other may provide a way to negotiate these complex is-
areas, for example, with the mandates of various sues, to build broad consensus on the application
UN forums that focus on the internet . The recent of human rights standards, and provide greater
appointment of a Special Rapporteur on Freedom access to, and measurement of, accountability
of Association provides an opportunity to explore mechanisms . n
such an approach taking account of modern hu-
man rights movements, the use of the internet and
ICTs to mobilise, and the special situation of human
rights defenders seeking to improve democratic
participation . New forms of accountability may yet
emerge, as well as new remedies that relate specifi-
cally to the internet .
34 Access (2011) To Regulate or Not to Regulate, Is That the
Question? A Roadmap to Smart Regulation of the Internet,
discussion paper released ahead of the OECD High-Level Meeting
on the Internet Economy on 28-29 June 2011 . www .accessnow .
org/policy-activism/docs
35 See footnote 22 .
36 Ruggie, J . (2011) Report of the Special Representative of the
Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational
corporations and other business enterprises. Guiding Principles
on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations
“Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework, 21 March,
A/HRC/17/31, para . 26-31 .
Thematic reports / 19
16. Freedom of expression on the internet:
Implications for foreign policy
Ben Wagner Following Clinton’s remarks, several European
European University Institute, Department countries began to develop internet freedom ini-
of Political and Social Sciences tiatives, which were generally understood to be a
www .eui .eu response to the suppression of mass public protests
in Iran in 2009 . Perhaps the best known of these is
the Franco-Dutch initiative which was launched in a
Introduction
joint communiqué by Bernard Kouchner and Maxime
Since the birth of the public internet, questions of Verhagen, then French and Dutch foreign ministers,
global internet governance have also been questions in May 2010 . The initiative culminated in a meeting
of international affairs .1 However, while internet se- at ministerial level on “The Internet and Freedom of
curity has historically been heavily politicised at an Expression” in July 2010 .6 Here too the key aspects
international level, it is only more recently that the of the meeting agenda were the support of the sup-
questions of internet expression and free speech posed revolutionary activities of “cyber dissidents”
have been perceived as a foreign policy issue . The and the ambiguous role of the corporate sector . How-
following analysis will provide an overview of the ever, the Franco-Dutch initiative includes significantly
two key foreign policy debates on free expression stronger references to a human rights framework to
on the internet, before suggesting paths for the de- guarantee freedom of expression, compared to the
velopment of future internet foreign policy and what US State Department’s internet freedom initiative .
consequences these paths are likely to have for free- Since the Franco-Dutch initiative, however, it ap-
dom of expression on the internet . pears that the two countries have taken divergent
paths in their approach to internet freedom . This can
Internet freedom as foreign policy
be attributed in significant part to cabinet reshuffles
The “internet freedom debate” has become one of the and shifting balances of power within the respective
most important international debates on international governments . The French foreign ministry has been
freedom of expression and foreign policy .2 One of the hit by a turbulent period following the resignation
most important public statements of such a foreign of Bernard Kouchner . In this period the presidential
policy initiative was United States (US) Secretary of palace increasingly came to dominate internet for-
State Hillary Clinton’s “Remarks on Internet Freedom”3 eign policy following President Nicolas Sarkozy’s
made on 21 January 2010 . Despite including other call for a “civilised internet”, with the state acting as
countries, the obvious focus of her statement was a civilising force .7 In the Netherlands, parliamentary
China and Iran, which are both mentioned more than elections in 2010 and the resulting cabinet reshuf-
any other country . Moreover, within this foundational fle has also led to the appointment of a new foreign
statement on internet freedom as foreign policy, two minister, Uriel Rosenthal . In contrast to France, he
key aspects stand out: the assumption that ensur- recently stated his interest to go beyond existing
ing freedom of expression might serve to foment “US internet freedom initiatives, suggesting that indus-
friendly revolutions”4 and the highly ambiguous role of try self-regulation is insufficient and that additional
the corporate sector in securing free expression .5 governmental regulation is necessary .8
1 Tallo, I . (2011) eGovernment and eParticipation, paper presented 6 de la Chapelle, B . (2010) Remarks by Bertrand de la Chapelle during
at the European University Institute workshop Government and the the Dynamic Coalition on Freedom of Expression and Freedom of
Internet: Participation, Expression and Control, Florence, Italy, 8-9 the Media on the Internet Coalition Meeting, at the 5th Internet
March . Governance Forum, Vilnius, Estonia, 14-17 September . webcast .
2 Ross, A . (2010) Internet Freedom: Historic Roots and the Road intgovforum .org/ondemand/?media=workshops
Forward, SAIS Review, 30 (2), p . 3-15; McCarthy, D . R . (2011) Open 7 Woitier, C . (2011) Sarkozy préfère «l’internet civilisé»
Networks and the Open Door: American Foreign Policy and the aux cyberdissidents, Le Figaro, 20 May . www .lefigaro .fr/
Narration of the Internet, Foreign Policy Analysis, January . politique/2011/05/20/01002-20110520ARTFIG00584-sarkozy-
3 Clinton, H . (2010) Remarks on Internet Freedom . www .state .gov/ prefere-l-internet-civilise-aux-cyberdissidents .php
secretary/rm/2010/01/135519 .htm 8 Rosenthal, U . (2011) Speech by Dutch Foreign Minister Uri Rosenthal
4 Nye, J . S . J . (2009) Get Smart: Combining Hard and Soft Power, at the International Digital Economy Accords (IDEA) Brussels Meeting,
Foreign Affairs, 88 (4) . Brussels, Belgium, 23-24 March . www .rijksoverheid .nl/documenten-en-
5 Human Rights Watch (2006) “Race to the bottom”: Corporate complicity publicaties/toespraken/2011/03/24/speech-by-pieter-de-gooijer-at-the-
in Chinese internet censorship, Human Rights Watch, New York . international-digital-economy-accords-idea-brussels-meeting .html
20 / Global Information Society Watch
17. The internet freedom debate has also reached the expression on the internet within existing human rights
German foreign ministry . Despite widespread public law, looking for ways of applying existing norms and
debates about national internet governance and developing “new rights” for the internet .11 This strategy
regulation within Germany, these debates have had is typically pursued in co-operation with existing inter-
a limited impact on German foreign policy outside of national institutions which promote human rights and
Europe until relatively recently . Following this model, freedom of expression, including the United Nations (UN) .
the first statement on internet freedom made by the A recent report by UN Special Rapporteur Frank La
German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle in May Rue entitled “Report on the promotion and protection
2011 draws significantly more on international dis- of the right to freedom of opinion and expression” is
courses on internet freedom than national debates primarily devoted to developing “general principles on
about internet governance and regulation .9 the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
Consequently, the challenge facing the German, internet”12 as well as a framework within which internet
French, Dutch and US foreign ministries is to create a content can reasonably be restricted . This report was
coherent overall frame for internet governance that based on an extensive consultation process with gov-
considers both national and international debates . ernments, civil society, international corporations and
It is important to note that the US, Dutch, French and experts . Consequently, it represents probably the single
German foreign ministries have all created internal most well-developed framework for applying human
structures that are explicitly tasked with pursuing in- rights norms to freedom of expression on the internet .
ternet freedom policies which promote freedom of The Swedish foreign ministry has been particularly
expression internationally . This should in the medi- actively following this strategy at various different lev-
um and long term lead to noticeable development of els, most notably through consistent support of the
internet foreign policy initiatives . However, as was pre- Special Rapporteur .13 Its long-standing support of hu-
viously noted, their ability to effect meaningful change man rights frameworks on the internet gives the foreign
on government policy depends heavily on dynamics ministry a considerable level of international credibility
within the respective ministries and governments . when it comes to free expression on the internet, as
Equally, there are signs that the internet freedom does its ability to organise statements on freedom of
debate is maturing, both in regard to the development expression on the internet representing a broad inter-
of substantive policy initiatives on internet freedom national coalition at the UN Human Rights Council .14
and a greater coherence between national and interna- The pursuit of a human rights-based approach
tional policy . A recent report by the Washington think has also led to the development of a wide variety
tank Center for New American Security, entitled “Inter- of declarations, principles and charters of rights on
net Freedom: A Foreign Policy Imperative in the Digital the internet . These are typically developed within
Age”,10 proposes eight “principles” which should guide international organisations or multi-stakeholder
internet freedom policies in the US, many of which coalitions and attempt to develop human rights
involve substantive policy initiatives for promoting frameworks which also apply to freedom of expres-
freedom of expression such as reforming export con- sion on the internet .15 The content of these documents
trols, creating economic incentives for corporations to is extremely diverse and ranges from an elaboration
support freedom of expression, and an attempt to cre- of basic principles such as the Brazilian Principles
ate international norms . for the Governance and Use of the Internet (2009),
the Global Network Initiative Principles (2008) or the
Internet human rights as foreign policy Council of Europe’s Internet Governance Principles
While the internet freedom debate continues, another (2011), to more extensive documents which seek to
strand of the international debate on freedom of expres- elaborate and apply rights such as the Association for
sion on the internet is noticeably distinct and could be
termed the “human rights-based approach” . This strat- 11 Benedek, W ., Kettemann, M . C . and Senges, M . (2008) The
egy has specifically been pursued by a number of states, Humanization of Internet Governance: A roadmap towards a
comprehensive global (human) rights architecture for the Internet.
particularly Sweden and Brazil, as well as a variety of www .worldcat .org/title/humanization-of-internet-governance-
international organisations and civil society actors . This a-roadmap-towards-a-comprehensive-global-human-rights-
discourse seeks to situate the debate on freedom of architecture-for-the-internet/oclc/619152167&referer=brief_results
12 La Rue, F . (2011) Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion
and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression,
9 Westerwelle, G . (2011) Gastbeitrag von Guido Westerwelle: Die Freiheit UN Human Rights Council, Geneva, p . 6 .
im Netz, Frankfurter Rundschau, 27 May . www .fr-online .de/politik/ 13 Bildt, C . (2011) Carl Bildt’s remarks on Digital Authoritarianism .
meinung/die-freiheit-im-netz/-/1472602/8496970/-/index .html www .sweden .gov .se/sb/d/14194/a/169246
10 Fontaine, R . and Rogers, W . (2011) Internet Freedom: A Foreign 14 Knutsson, J . (n .d .) Freedom of Expression on the Internet Cross-
Policy Imperative in the Digital Age, Center for a New American regional Statement . www .sweden .gov .se/sb/d/14194/a/170566
Security, Washington, D .C . 15 Benedek, Kettemann and Senges (2008) op . cit .
Thematic reports / 21
18. Progressive Communications (APC) Internet Rights into foreign policy . The three key aspects that are per-
Charter (2006)16 or the Charter of Human Rights and sistently mentioned in this regard are (1) a linkage to
Principles for the Internet (2010) . existing human rights frameworks, (2) the perceived
Common to all these documents is their reference to role of the internet in enabling or fuelling revolutions,
international human rights law, most frequently to the and (3) the questionable role of the private sector .
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) . More- However, these aspects are developed in very different
over, they are typically developed by a wide range of policy contexts . “Internet freedom strategies” focus
stakeholders from various institutional backgrounds, more on specific foreign policy goals and specific events
including civil society, the private sector, and the aca- which are perceived to be causally linked to freedom of
demic and technical communities . Foreign ministries, expression, typically protest events and revolutions . In
while often directly involved in the drafting process, contrast, “internet human rights strategies” focus more
have not typically taken leadership in the drafting of on developing and embedding aspects of freedom on
such documents . the internet into existing human rights frameworks .
One of the most interesting examples of such In the case of internet freedom-based strate-
collaborative efforts is the Charter of Human Rights gies, overall government internet policy coherence
and Principles for the Internet,17 which was devel- is particularly important . This stems from very differ-
oped by the Internet Rights and Principles Dynamic ent international and national policy strategies on
Coalition of the Internet Governance Forum . To give the internet, leading to value conflicts which may be
some idea of the diversity involved in the drafting particularly harmful for foreign policy . The tension be-
process, the Steering Committee of the Coalition is tween internet policies at a national level – WikiLeaks
composed of academics from Japan, Brazil, the UK in the US or the HADOPI law in France – and a foreign
and the US, Indian, US and Brazilian civil society policy which promotes internet freedom is by no means
representatives, German, US and UK private sector lost on those addressed by these policies . The chal-
actors, representatives of the Council of Europe and lenge here is not just to bring the relevant policy areas
UNESCO, and a Swedish diplomat . together in one document, as was the case in the US
Fundamental to all of these documents is the belief International Strategy for Cyberspace,18 but to develop
that human rights are a relevant frame for promoting the a coherent framework with principles that can be ap-
rights of individuals on the internet . Consequently, this plied across ministries and policy areas .
approach stands and falls with the acknowledgement of Here internet human rights strategies are at an
“internet human rights” within the wider human rights advantage, as they already have a clear set of princi-
community and international human rights law . It would ples, but are dependent on the acknowledgement of
seem that with the report by La Rue, which was present- “internet rights as human rights” .19 They also profit
ed to the Human Rights Council, a significant step in this from a wide base of stakeholders who are involved
direction has been taken, but it remains to be seen how in the drafting process . Considering the number of
the report itself is received . charters and principles currently circulating, it re-
mains to be seen whether a coherent overall internet
The paths ahead? Internet policy coherence… human rights framework can be developed .
While many states are prepared to affirm the im- Finally, as internet freedom policies mature and
portance of human rights and rights to freedom of internet human rights frameworks develop, there is
expression on the internet, as mentioned, relatively likely to be an increasing overlap between both in-
few have been actively involved in the process of ternet freedom and human rights-based strategies .
developing the charters and principles which have While the divide between states pursuing separate
proliferated over the last five years . Although these foreign policy strategies on these issues is likely to re-
processes do not necessarily have to lead to interna- main, due to differing strategic interests and foreign
tional treaties like the Council of Europe Cybercrime policy objectives, there is reason to suggest that there
Convention (2001), they do provide a space for de- might be space for greater cooperation between states
fining and elaborating concepts and principles on in developing policies which pursue greater freedom of
freedom of expression on the internet . expression on the internet . n
Increasingly, foreign ministries have to wrestle with
translating initiatives related to freedom of expression
18 US National Security Council (2011) International Strategy for
Cyberspace: Prosperity, Security, and Openness in a Networked
16 Association for Progressive Communications (2006) APC Internet World, Executive Office of the President of the United States,
Rights Charter . www .apc .org/en/node/5677 National Security Council, Washington, D .C .
17 Internet Rights and Principles Dynamic Coalition (2010) Charter 19 Association for Progressive Communications (2011) Internet Rights
of Human Rights and Principles for the Internet: Beta Version 1.1. Are Human Rights. www .apc .org/en/pubs/briefs/internet-rights-
internetrightsandprinciples .org/node/367 are-human-rights-claims-apc-human-
22 / Global Information Society Watch
19. Towards a cyber security strategy
for global civil society?
Ron Deibert Prior to laying out the elements of such a strat-
The Canada Centre for Global Security Studies egy, it is useful to take a step back and look at some
and the Citizen Lab, Munk School of Global Affairs, major social forces that are shaping the domain of
University of Toronto global communications . The internet’s de facto and
www .citizenlab .org distributed regime of governance – largely informal
and driven up to now by decisions of like-minded
engineers – has come under massive stress as a
Cyberspace is at a watershed moment . Techno- function of the internet’s continuing rapid growth .
logical transformations have brought about an Not only have there been continuing exponential
architectonic change in the communications eco- increases in users and deeper penetration into
system . Cyber crime has exploded to the point of everyday life (a recent Cisco report1 said that by
becoming more than a nuisance, but a national se- 2020, there will be 50 billion “things”, meaning
curity concern . There is a seriously escalating arms devices, connected to the internet), but there has
race in cyberspace as governments scale up capa- been a vast growth in the developing world, as mil-
bilities in their armed forces to fight and win wars in lions of new digital natives come online . With these
this domain . Telecommunication companies, inter- new digital natives come new values and interests
net service providers (ISPs) and other private sector that in turn are affecting internet governance, as
actors now actively police the internet . Pressures governments like China, Russia and India exercise
to regulate the global network of information and their influence . The latter are now key players in
communications have never been greater . several internet governance forums, and have been
Although states were once thought to be pow- collectively pushing for the legitimisation of na-
erless in the face of the internet, the giants have tionalised controls, such as those over the domain
been woken from their slumber . How exactly gov- naming system . They also have a shared interest in
ernments react to these problems will determine limiting the voices of civil society in these decision-
the future of cyberspace – and by extension the making forums, an interest exemplified by the push
communications platforms upon which global civic to have the United Nations and the International
networks depend . Telecommunication Union (a state-based organi-
Global civil society, now increasingly recog- sation) take the lead on internet governance . Civic
nised as an important stakeholder in cyberspace networks need to be vigilant that such a strategy
governance, needs to step up to the challenge . A does not succeed .
constitutive moment awaits . What is required is Another major force shaping cyberspace arises
nothing less than a serious and comprehensive out of technological innovation and economic fac-
security strategy for cyberspace that addresses tors that have created the architectonic shifts in the
the very real threats that plague governments and nature of the ecosystem of global communications .
corporations, addresses national and other security Whereas before the internet was largely a self-seg-
concerns in a forthright manner, while protecting mented and isolated network generally separate
and preserving open networks of information and from other means of communication, such as televi-
communication . It is an enormous challenge but sion, telephony and radio, all of these media have
also a great opportunity that, if not handled well, integrated into a single system of planetary commu-
could end up having major detrimental conse- nications, which we call cyberspace . The integration
quences for human rights online . Of course, “global of these media into a common space has happened
civil society” is not an undifferentiated whole, but at the same time that business models and service
an amalgam of multiple and diverse local networks . delivery mechanisms for information and communi-
Regardless of their differences, citizens who share cations have changed fundamentally, with the rise
an interest in democracy and human rights also of social networking, cloud computing, and mobile
share common interests in a secure but open global forms of connectivity . This paradigm shift has upset
communications space . Those common interests
can lay the basis for a civil society cyber security
1 www .readwriteweb .com/archives/cisco_50_billion_things_on_
strategy . the_internet_by_2020 .php
Thematic reports / 23
