[Chapter-delegates] Internet and Constitution

[kummer at isoc.org]

There are others, although I do not have an overview. Switzerland for example also included the Internet into the universal service obligation. For some reason the Swiss policy announcement was more low key and therefore received less attention than the Finnish example.

The main point here is that there is a fundamental difference between a human right as enshrined in Article 19 and a positive right, as the right to have an Internet connection would be. The classical human rights protect the individual from the State. The State is asked not to do anything, but to let the individual enjoy his basic rights and freedom. The positive right however gives an obligation to the State "to do something", that is to provide access to the Internet. Apart from some basic questions as to who would pay for this right, it would also blur the role of the State and could be potentially dangerous, as it might be tempting for some governments to interpret extensively their role and also interfere in an are where they should keep out.

The universal service obligation is a much neater solution, as it imposes an obligation on the carrier to provide access to areas where otherwise it might not be commercially viable. This is a well tested regulatory measure and used for postal and telecommunication services in many countries.

Best regards
Markus



-----Original Message-----
From: "Alejandro Pisanty" <apisan at servidor.unam.mx>
Sent: Tuesday, 26 April, 2011 17:47
To: "Khaled KOUBAA" <khaled.koubaa at gmail.com>
Cc: chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] Internet and Constitution

Khaled,

the primary example at a national level is FINLAND.

Alejandro Pisanty


.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . .  .  .  .  .  .
      Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico

Tels. +52-(1)-55-5105-6044, +52-(1)-55-5418-3732

* Mi blog/My blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
* LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
* Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
* Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614

* Ven a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org.mx, ISOC http://www.isoc.org
*Participa en ICANN, http://www.icann.org
.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .


On Tue, 26 Apr 2011, Khaled KOUBAA wrote:

> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 10:31:06 +0100
> From: Khaled KOUBAA <khaled.koubaa at gmail.com>
> To: chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] Internet and Constitution
> 
> Thank you Markus.
>> 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.
>>
> Can you give e some example of which European country and what did they do ?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>
_______________________________________________
Chapter-delegates mailing list
Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates