[EN] HR Caucus - Comments on Political Chapeau and Operational Part

[Meryem Marzouki <marzouki@ras.eu.org>]

Dear all,

Please find hereafter the English version of the HR caucus comments on 
the Political Chapeau and the Operational Part. The document in Englidh 
and French is online at:

[EN/HTML]: 
http://www.iris.sgdg.org/actions/smsi/hr-wsis/hris-gfc-040305-en.html
[EN/PDF]: 
http://www.iris.sgdg.org/actions/smsi/hr-wsis/hris-gfc-040305-en.pdf
[FR/HTML]: 
http://www.iris.sgdg.org/actions/smsi/hr-wsis/hris-gfc-040305-fr.html
[FR/PDF]: 
http://www.iris.sgdg.org/actions/smsi/hr-wsis/hris-gfc-040305-fr.pdf

[To HR caucus members: any translation of this finalized version is 
welcome. To avoid duplicate efforts, please announce on the caucus list 
your intentions to provide a translation. Thanks.]

Meryem Marzouki
===============
Comments on the Political Chapeau and the Operational Part
Human Rights Caucus Contribution
to the Work of the Group of the Friends of the Chair
March 4th, 2005

[NB. This contribution relates to available versions, as of March 4th, 
2005, of the Political Chapeau and the Operational Part, that is, 
versions respectively dated January 20th, 2005 and February 25th, 2005]

I. 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 
use information and communication technology to enhance effective 
implementation of human rights standards at the national level. Since 
the human rights framework is the agreed point of departure for the 
development of the information society, as affirmed in the WSIS 
Declaration of Principles, the follow up phase must address the 
challenge of bringing people and countries closer to the human right 
standards outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 
encompassing the two international covenants on Civil and Political 
Rights (CCPR), and Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR).

A human rights approach implies that human rights standards such as 
human and social development, democracy, participation and the rule of 
law are used as focus points for setting goals and measures for 
progress. The de facto status of human rights in a given national 
context is indicative for the level of development, freedom, democracy 
and the rule of law. So far the proposed measures for progress have 
concentrated on infrastructure with less emphasis on, for instance:
	- Human development (measures on improved health, education, 
livelihood, and integrity)
	- Social and cultural development (measures on enhanced economic 
opportunities and employment, and on diversity including cultural and 
linguistic diversity)
	- Democracy (measures on compliance with freedom of expression 
standards, access to information, privacy protection, media pluralism, 
transparency, participation in decision making, and local capacity 
building)

Furthermore, a regulatory environment respectful of human rights needs 
to be ensured both nationally and internationally for human rights to 
have practical effect. In other words, it should be clearly affirmed 
that national and regional ICT regulation must comply with 
international human rights standards.

The protection of some human rights was not adequately reflected during 
the first phase, as the human rights caucus stressed on several 
occasions. This is specially the case with regards to the right to 
privacy, labor rights and the principle of non discrimination.

The WSIS Declaration of Principles lacks a reference to the fundamental 
and crosscutting principle of non-discrimination that should have been 
mentioned within one of the opening paragraphs, as well as reference to 
international labor standards.

In relation to privacy and security, the Human Rights Caucus is 
concerned with the lack of focus on privacy protection; the WSIS 
Declaration of Principles focus almost entirely on national security 
threats and cybercrime. The discussion around security would be 
enhanced by a clear understanding that true security can only be 
achieved by measures that are fully compatible with international human 
right standards and particularly the right to privacy.

Another crucial human rights issue relates to the WSIS Declaration of 
Principles paragraph on "enabling environment" and the rule of law, in 
which it is stated that the regulatory framework is expected to reflect 
national realities. The Human Rights 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, which dissociates development from human rights. As 
affirmed in the Vienna Declaration, human rights are universal, 
indivisible, interrelated and interdependent, thus no development 
without democracy, no democracy without development. The objectives of 
the Millennium development goals and the realization of human rights 
are interdependent, and should advance one another. Human rights are 
not a sectoral issue, relevant to certain stakeholders only, but are 
one of the essential purposes of the United Nations, according to its 
Charter.

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 
development and user confidence, as well as on the economy of 
information society services. In addition, working conditions and 
regulation that comply with human rights standards, not least the right 
to privacy at work, is essential to create a sustainable information 
society economy at both micro and macro level.

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. Internet governance must not result in a lawless zone 
escaping international human rights protection.

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 Millennium goals and to realize the commitments made in 
the WSIS Declaration of Principles.

II. 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 the Geneva Summit, the Human Rights Caucus 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 very concerned that the operational 
part of this second phase fails to show any tangible progress in this 
respect.

Human rights are standards for measuring economic and social progress 
and for holding governments accountable. They should be used as 
benchmarks to follow national implementation of the political goals of 
the WSIS Declaration of Principles.

The human rights caucus has the following proposals, to be included in 
dedicated paragraphs of the Operational Part:

(Chapter One, Paragraph 7)
Precise indicators should be defined, in order to evaluate the 
realization of an information society protecting and promoting human 
rights. These should be the benchmarks by which we measure progress and 
by which we review state legislation and policies. As we stated in our 
comments with regards to the Political Chapeau, the objectives of the 
Millennium development goals and the realization of human rights are 
interdependent, and should advance one another. These indicators on 
human rights realization are thus a required part of overall indicators 
in order to measure ICT for development.

(Chapter One, Paragraph 10)
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".
The proposal could be integrated into paragraph 10 of the Operational 
Part, in which it is stated that "a team of stakeholder" on different 
action lines would be useful to promote follow-up and implementation of 
the WSIS Declaration of Principles.
A Commission working on monitoring and promoting human rights standards 
in the Information Society could be a very useful mechanism to serve 
this end on a specific action line dedicated to human rights (see below 
our proposal regarding Action lines). We recommend that the Office of 
the High Commissioner for Human Rights serve as the coordinating body 
of the work of such a team, and that its findings and recommendations 
be included in the annual report of this UN body.

(Chapter One, Paragraph 11)
Among the proposed options for a defined global coordination body, the 
Human Rights Caucus favors the proposal of a newly-created UN 
interagency task force. None of the existing UN division or agency has, 
alone, a broad enough focus to deal with the transverse character of 
topics related to the WSIS Declaration of Principles. Moreover, the 
diversity of civil society organizations participating in the WSIS 
process, as well as the number and variety of intergovernmental 
organizations taking part in this process, make it obvious that a new 
and transverse (both in thematic and regional terms) body should be 
created, so that inclusiveness becomes a reality. Furthermore, a UN 
interagency Task force should be preferred over simply a UN ICT-Task 
force type forum, in that the former would lead to true commitments, 
better follow-up on decision implementation, while showing more 
transparency and accountability.

(Chapter Two, Paragraph 20)
Human rights learning should be included explicitly in the operational 
part. Human Rights learning is crucial for people to actually 
understand and claim their rights, and any capacity building program 
must include a human rights learning component in order to be complete 
and to lead to effective outcome. In line with the UN decade on human 
rights education and linking it to WSIS, human rights learning should 
be promoted as an integrated part of education curricula, with special 
emphasis on human rights challenges in the information society.

(Chapter Two, Paragraph 37)
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 that 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.

(Annex: Action lines, C10)
We request to replace current C10 action line ("Ethical dimensions of 
the Information Society") by a specific action line dedicated to human 
rights in the information society. First of all, while human rights are 
indeed a transverse issue, which should be the fundamental basis to any 
development and assessment under all the defined action lines, we 
consider that the full realization of human rights in the information 
society context needs specific initiatives to be undertaken, such as 
those proposed by the Human Rights Caucus in this contribution.
Moreover, the lack of any action line dedicated to human rights in 
current version of the operational part annex is a grave and 
unacceptable deficit. If not remedied, such a failure would mean that 
WSIS second phase is already breaching the commitment made in WSIS 
first phase, that is, to build an information society based on human 
rights.
Finally, as already stated by the Human Rights Caucus, in a joint 
statement with the Privacy and Security Working Group ("Comments on the 
Non-Paper produced by WSIS process President after PrepCom3", October 
28, 2003), the concept of "ethical principles" or "ethical dimensions" 
is too broad and vague, and opens for possible misuse, for instance in 
terms of censorship and violations of fundamental rights like the right 
to freedom of expression and the right to privacy.
In line with our proposal regarding chapter one, paragraph 10, the 
coordination of this action line dedicated to human rights in the 
information society should be ensured by the Office of the High 
Commissioner for Human Rights.