1. The document discusses issues around internet governance and filtering, noting that while the internet is a critical global resource, there are currently no enforceable international laws governing access. 2. It outlines some principles of internet governance inspired by international law, and examines how different countries justify internet filtering to uphold community standards or ensure national security. 3. The document concludes that while states have independent control over internet access within their borders, there are no meaningful external legal checks and the UN currently takes no stance on internet governance internationally.

1. By Ghazala A Ajami
Internet Governance
An Inspiration by International Law

2. The Question of the Internet-Does it Assume Intervention in Society and State?
GLOBALIZED ACCESS OF
INFORMATION

3. Introduction
 Internet is a critical trans-boundary information
resource that should be governed and protected like
other common critical resources.
 Various risks may follow the internet infrastructure.
These vary from technicalities to interstate disputes.
 Until this date, in an interstate context, there are no
enforceable rights of internet access although we see
initiatives to setting guidelines for internet governance.

4. Governance & Internet Filtering
 The WGIG Report and other documents
produced in the WSIS/WGIG process are a solid
basis for reflection on the main issues of
Internet governance. The Tunis WSIS
Declaration provides the necessary policy
endorsement of the overall process and a
possible basis for soft law status vs. real law of
some agreed solutions.

5. Inspired by International Law
 Some internet governing principles were derived from
the text on “Responsibility of States for Internationally
Wrongful Acts” (2001) adopted by the International
Law Commission.
 Article 2 – Elements of an internationally wrongful act
of a State
 Article 31 – Reparation
 Article 49 – Object and limits of countermeasures

6. Who Filters? Public vs. Private
 Location, Quantity, and Manner of the filtering
vary greatly
 Private parties are often centrally involved in
Internet filtering
 filtering may occur through a completely private
transaction or with some government
involvement in some fashion

7. Law, Regulation, and Policy of Current
Filtering Regimes
 The two components of a typical country’s
filtering regime are a (1) justification for
blocking certain material, and (2)a set of laws
that enable filtering.
 Countries usually justify the laws that enable
filtering by invoking one of two broad themes:
a. Upholding Community Standards
b. Ensuring National Security

8. Upholding Community Standards
 One of Singapore’s “main concerns” with the Internet is the ease of
access to pornography by minors.
 South Korea banned content dealing with euthanasia and
hacking, and, in a move that attracted widespread media
attention, ordered local ISPs to block access to video footage of the
gruesome beheading of a Korean hostage in Iraq.
 Legislation in India blocks sites that “appeal to the prurient interest,”
 Australian law prohibits sites that include “information about crime or
drug use.”
 Egypt bans Internet content on “taboo issues” such as criticism of its
president
 Uzbekistan prohibits accessing materials critical of the country’s
president or based on religious extremism.

9. Ensuring National Security
 In China, protecting national security includes banning speech
that could threaten “national unity.”
 Burma, Egypt, and Malaysia forbid any content that criticizes
the ruling party.
 Liberia has blocked Web sites that contain “anti-Liberian
material,”
 Zimbabwe excludes foreign sites that publish anything “likely to
cause alarm or despondency”

10. Laws that Enable Filtering
 Countries vary in the laws, regulations, and policies
they enact to implement filtering regimes. Some states
employ regulation specific to the Internet. Countries
use laws of general applicability to restrict Internet
content. Foremost among these are intellectual
property laws

11. Legal Problems of Internet Filtering
 Civil Liberties: Speech, Press, Privacy, Religion, and
Association.
 Jurisdiction
 Internet Governance
 International Law
 Telecommunications Law
 Other Kinds of “Law”

12. Can jus cogens be applied to the Internet?
 Jus cogens could be applied in such situations
when the Internet is used for promotion or
organization of prohibited acts, such as
piracy, slavery, and genocide.

13. Are There Any Effective Legal Limitations on
a State’s Ability to Filter?
 Each state maintains independent control over the
nature and extent of Internet access of its citizens.
There are no meaningful external legal checks on a
country’s ability to filter the Internet access of its
citizens, as there are no international treaties or
declarations safeguarding a free and open Internet.
Currently, the United Nations takes no stance on the
Internet, though proposals have been put forth to
bring Internet governance under its jurisdiction.

14. HOT DEBATE
Wikileaks
GENEVA, Dec 9 (Reuters) - U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay
 "The case raises complex human rights questions about balancing the
freedom of information, the right of the people to know, and the need to
protect national security or public order," … "This balancing act is a difficult
one."