[Chapter-delegates] Internet and Constitution

[Franck Martin]

Franck Martin 
http://www.avonsys.com/ 
http://www.facebook.com/Avonsys 
http://www.linkedin.com/company/avonsys 
twitter: FranckMartin Avonsys 

Check your domain reputation: http://gurl.im/b69d4o 
Application Monitoring: http://gurl.im/4d39Gu 


----- Original Message -----
> From: "Markus Kummer" <kummer at isoc.org>
> To: "Chapter Delegates" <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
> Cc: chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org
> Sent: Tuesday, 26 April, 2011 8:55:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] Internet and Constitution
> Hi,
> 
> Khaled started an interesting discussion! I just wanted to add my
> voice to those who spoke in favour of Art. 19 of the UDHR. This
> Article gives us all the elements we need and I don't think it will be
> possible to improve on that language at the level of principles.
> Tunisia would be well advised to incorporate it into the new
> constitution (and respect and enforce it, of course)!
> 
> We had some discussions during WSIS whether we should try and
> formulate new human rights adapted to the information society, as some
> vicil society groups asked for. Seasoned human rights experts advised
> strongly against it. Their feeling was that any reopening of the
> existing instrument would give us a result that would be worse than
> what we already have.
> 
> To define access to the Internet as a positive right is not without
> problems. This is best dealt with as a universal service obligation,
> as some European countries have done already.
> 

I prefer Universal Access Obligation, there is a slight difference but can make some difference in the investment a country has to do especially in developing countries.

A USO, means anyone that request it must have it wherever they live (very expensive to do)
a UAO, means anyone must have reasonable access to it, like being able to go to an Internet cafe/Internet center to get it (way cheaper)