[Privsec] support from Berlin Group chairman

[Ralf Bendrath]

Robert Guerra wrote:

> I read today's transcripts and it seems several speakers mentioned that
> Privacy and/or data protection should be one of the topics for the igf
> to deal with.
Yes, among them Brazil, the US, Quebec, and the OECD. Former Swiss 
ambassador Daniel Stauffacher also spoke, now in his new capacity as 
"private sector". He added "identity protection and management" to the 
list, which is something most of the diplomats have not understood yet, 
but is being heavily pushed by many companies.

My impression: Many of them used the whole package of "cybercrime, 
cybersecurity, spam and privacy", which we know is a common method of 
playing down privacy...

Rikke of course was good as usual. I quote her intervention from the 
afternoon session, according to the transcript, below. (Though I am not 
sure if sharing "best practices" is enough, this is clearly OECD turf, as 
they made clear... We have to push for more, like the rule of law etc.)

The Council of Europe rep also talked about the importance of Human Right 
protection on the Internet, but mainly wanted to enlarge the CoE's turf, I 
guess. I copy his/her (?) intervention after Rikke's.

Can anyone from Geneva confirm my remote impressions?

Ralf

-------------------

http://www.intgovforum.org/contributions/IGF-1-021606pm.txt

RIKKE:
Danish institute for human rights:  Thank you, chair.
  My name is Rikke Frank Jorgensen.
  I am from the Danish human rights institute.
  I am part of the WSIS human rights caucus and also the privacy and 
security working group.
  Both groups have made written contributions to this meeting, which I 
won't read out aloud.
  But I would rather pick out a few points to reflect on the discussions 
that we have had today.
  I was thinking this morning and also this afternoon during the 
discussion, what is it that's really special about this forum compared to 
other similar spaces, policy spaces we have?
  And I think there are two things, at least, that are very special.
  One is that we actually, with this forum, have a space that can provide 
policy analysis across existing issue-specific arenas.
  I mean, this was stressed when it was set up.
  And I think this is important to bear in mind.
  And another specific aspect of it is that it is a child of the WSIS 
commitment to actually use ICT to promote development and human rights.
  In other words, this space entails a commitment to actually advance the 
issues that was raised during the WSIS process and which is spelled out in 
detail in the political documents from Geneva and Tunis.
  One of these issues that we have discussed again and again in the WSIS 
process is human rights compliance of future Internet governance mechanisms.
  Another, more general, issue is the one of promoting an information 
society which actually enhance human rights protection both at national 
and international level.
  And what we, as human rights caucus, would like to see advanced through 
the forum is that this so-called human rights-based approach to Internet 
policy develops into something that is more concrete, that we move forward 
when we say that we need to assess -- to use the human rights standards as 
they are spelled out in international law as actually assessing these 
policies.
  If we look at the Internet policy arena globally from -- with human 
rights glasses on, there are a number of developments that are very 
worrying, most obviously in the field of privacy and freedom of expression.
  It is no secret that in the current political climate that is so much 
driven by the so-called war on terror, international privacy standards, 
they are under the strongest pressure that they have been on since their 
adoption some 55 years ago.
  And they are currently being restricted in a number of areas with little 
or no legal safeguards to ensure checks and balances.
  With regard to freedom of expression, it is also well documented and 
well known that online freedom of expression is violated around the globe.
  This is both in the form of outright censorship, but it's also by more 
subtle measures that include privatized censorship, filtered information 
access, commercial censorship of search items, and criminalization of 
content that is completely legitimate under international freedom of 
expression standards.
  So these are just de facto policy developments, and they are not easy to 
address, they are very politically sensitive.
  I am very much aware of that.
  But, nevertheless, they are crucial to address if we really mean it when 
we say that we want an information society respectful of human rights.
  So what I would like to see as concrete studies of working group under 
this forum to address some of these issues and to advance the discussion 
on them would be two studies, actually.
  The first one would be on how human rights principles, as they are laid 
down in the international human rights treaties translate into Internet 
governance mechanisms.
  How do we transform them into concrete policy recommendations which 
protect and uphold and respect these standards?
  And this work should, of course, involve the relevant U.N. bodies, not 
least, the U.N. high commissioner for human rights.
  Another area would be privacy impact assessment of the regulation that's 
currently taking place in the field of cybercrime and counterterror.  To 
evaluate its compliance with human rights privacy standards and data 
protection guidelines.  And this work would involve the global network of 
privacy commissioners and could feed into the ongoing considerations in 
other fora for international legal standards in the privacy field.
  Thank you.

-----------------------

COUNCIL OF EUROPE
 >> Council of Europe:  Chairman Desai, Mr. Kummer.
  The council of Europe thanks you for convening this very open and 
inclusive consultation meeting so that we may focus our minds on, as you 
say, chairman, getting the IGF off the ground and by discussing what we 
expect to see from the IGF, with reference to possible outcomes N this 
context, the council of Europe sees itself as an active partner in the IGF 
process, in particular, in bringing the results of the WSIS documents to life.
  The council of Europe welcomes the chance to be one of the 
intergovernmental organizations referred to in Paragraph 72 (C) of the 
Tunis Agenda document, in order to discuss matters under its purview with 
the purview of this organization being one in which the rule of law, human 
rights, and democracy prevails in both offline and online environments.
  Indeed, many of you have already touched upon some of the council of 
Europe's work and values indirectly when you refer to the misuse and abuse 
of ICTs, to cybersecurity, and, of course, to cybercrime, in particular, 
you referred indirectly there to the council of Europe cybercrime 
convention, which, incidentally, will -- the parties and signatories and 
other interested persons will be meeting to discuss the convention's 
operation and functioning in Strasbourg on 20 and 21 March, 2006.
  Many of you already referred to human rights, such as freedom of 
expression and the right to privacy, which are contained in the European 
convention on human rights, and shaped by the European court of human 
rights in Strasbourg, which incidentally, the court is beginning to deal 
with a number of cases of human rights violations on the Internet.
  Certainly there's a need for us to think about one of the themes of 
discussion for this IGF as being the human rights culture for the 
Internet, I would say.
  On this basis, on the basis of the council of Europe's expertise, and 
not wishing to reinvent the wheel, and in response to your question, 
chairman, regarding what devolved and lightweight structure for the IGF, 
we should consider whether the council of Europe as a working 
multistakeholder organization comprising 46 member states, as well as 
other observer states and states who are making important contributions to 
our work, such as in the preparation of the cybercrime convention, whether 
we need to consider the council of Europe as a platform, even a meeting 
place, for dialogue to discuss public policy issues and to promote and 
assess WSIS principles.
  Thank you, chairman.