Digital Rights: Latin America - Part II

              This post is a summary og the same book from last weekend, the book published in 2017 at   https://itsrio.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/digital-rights.pdf

             What has been traditionally associated to journalism is now extended to people that elected the internet as their main tool of expression, for instance, bloggers, editors of websites and internet users. There are signs which indicates that freedom of expressions violations have the potential of getting more intense against these communicators, who are generally acting autonomously, without any support from the big companies of the communication sector. Thus, bloggers' and users' rights to protect themselves and to fully assure their right to freedom of expression on internet become an emergent theme concerning web governance. In 2012, Article 19 did the entire registration of the gravest cases of freedom of expression violations on the online environment in Brazil and produced a report called "Threats on the web." Unfortunately, the threats exceed the scope of judicial censorship. Journalists and bloggers are victims of physical aggression, death threats and murders because of what they say on internet. Article 19's research found 16 cases of serious threats to freedom of expression in 2012. It correspond to three homicides, three attempted murders and ten death threats against communicators that disseminated information, ideas and opinions on the web. The right to freedom of expression has been defined as "the fundamental pillar" of the democratic system. Network neutrality ensures that internet will remain open so that dissenting voices may express themselves and gain relevance from the interest of citizens and not by their economic power. The production of independent online content is gaining ground in Brazil to address the broadcasting oligopoly and media concentration in the hands of conservative families. The Civil Rights Framework for Internet Use ensures that requests for removal of content from net should only be imposed when there is a court order. This regulation has proved to be relevant in the case of the 2014 elections. Some politicians have invested against information disclosures, satires and online critiques, but now they need to pass the scrutiny of justice. In the case of privacy, the text states that private communication is inviolable and operators of telecommunications networkd are not allowed to monitor their clients. In dictatorships, surveillance is an essential tool that protects the regime. This is what makes the right to privacy a pillar for freedom of expression, freedom of opinion, and fundamental to democracy. The 8th Internet Governance Forum held in Bali, Indonesia. had as was expected, an intense agenda focused mainly on aspects related to security, privacy and human rights.The need to create workspaces and debates around how we want the internet to be built in the future is not only inevitable but also urgent. It seems unreasonable to think that strengthening the benevolent self-refulation and monitoring by the U.S. government into a multisectoral model full of vices, is the best way of solving the current problems. The role of governments is also important and urgent, but with respect for human rights and multisectoral involvement as a starting point. The internet management, the way in which decisions on its infrastructure, protocols and services are taken, is what is called internet governance. This refers to the development and application of principles, norms, rules, and decision-making procedures, and programmes that shape the evolution and use of the internet. These topics cover the internet entire universe and generally augment tensions between various components, for instance, security and privacy, freedom of expression and the protection of intellectual property, among others. The great advantage of digital activism is that it breaks space and time barriers. You can participate at any given time, at the level of engagement that your time and workload allow for. You can participate from home, from work, from the bus. Online activism is the only way to assure the democratic inclusion of the majority of the working population in political participation. But access to the internet is not enough to include people. It is essential to make good use of the internet. In fact, complaints which don't channel demands, or voice causes, don't generate change. Networks for mobilization such as Avaaz, Change, All Out, etc are able to help people articulate their demands, connect them to decision makers to whom these must be voiced and create a solidary community to deal with several causes. Online activism is what gives Brazil a chance to continually and consistenly democratize political disputes, which, for a long time, remained in the hands of forerunners and elites. This workhelp us deal to dispel the haze of confusion that seems innate to the citizen of the beginning of the 21st century. We can't deny the obvious: we are all confused. The chosen macro themes bring very deep and intriguing questions, starting with the protection of privacy. The world of today is a universe of obvious paradoxes. At first glance, we have more access to information, power of expression and interactivity. As public and private institutions are increasingly exposed, we have the impression of living in a more transparent world, closer to the truth. a lot of information, interaction and transparency leave us stunned by the relativization of everything.The selected articles contained in this book, present us with the current picture of difficult and intense times with controversial, polemic and complex dilemmas. They allow us to better understand how the various issues and problems being discussed in the region take place in the richness of the variety of their contexts. 

Digital Rights: Latin America

               This post is a summary of the book with the incomplete title above published in 2017 at   https://itsrio.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/digital-rights.pdf

               In the history of Human Rights, Latin America has been oscillating between defeat and inspiring leadership. Following World War II, the region led the creation of the world's first extensive international human rights instrument, the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, in April 1948, months before what would become its greater symbol, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But such commitment to rights was soon replaced by a succession of national dictatorial regimes, state violence and backlashes against freedom and democracy. Finally, a period of intense transformation arose from the ascension to power of governments with repressed plans of more political participation and social equality and freedom of expression. The new wave of hopes blended with the promises of digital rights. Internet and technology invited politics into its core and since then have been delivering a renewed agenda of rights and debates. We live today in a social scene that is largely in the digital world, in which various types of spaces and devices have become vital tools for recording events, news and expression. Digital platforms are used to share information and to promotea greater degree of participation and engagement in issues of public interest. Technology can bring us countless benefits, but it also creates difficult problems which need to be discussed if we aim to solve them. In terms of privacy, there is s growing fear that the development of new technologies might end up increasing the risk of violations in user's privacy. The astounding growth of social networks and connected devices greatly contributes to the expansion of the amount of information made public on the web, and generates some apprehension about its use. Such issues demonstrate how urgent it is for Latin America countries to develop comprehensive regulation regarding privacy. Many have already passed legislation that directly addresses this matter, but others, like Brazil, are falling behind and let serious violations occur. New tech developments also creates issues concerning fundamental rights, such as freedom of expression. Today, anyone can disclose his thoughts, ideas or discoveries through the globe. This constant stream of communication further serves to develop democratic participation. The tech and the way they are being used have transformed individuals into an important source of information, socio-political engagement and control of public power, allowing a greater empowerment of citizens, which triggers processes of social transformation. All these factors are representative of the emergence of a connected public sphere with significant democratic potential yet to be fully explored. In this perspective, we can already begin to see more solid contours of the consideration of this space as a fundamental dedmocratic space. In May 2011, the U.N. advocated the recognition of internet access as a human right, considering it one of the main means through which individuals may exercise their right to freedom of expression. U.N. expresses that the internet is a tool to promote development on several fronts. The deepening of democracy is one of the most remarkable of them. By drastically reducing costs and barriers to participation, the internet enables instantaneous responses,  broadening posibilities for discourse and debates. In promoting citizens engagement and political participation, the doctrine has identified the impact of the internet on the mechanisms of : 1) improving the transparency of the political processes, by monitoring the actions of government officials and public resources. 2) facilitation of direct involvement and active participation in political processes. 3) improving the quality of the formation of public opinion, with the opening of new spaces for imformation and deliberation. In 2013, Brazil experienced a couple of the biggest protests in its history. A raise in bus fares was the catalyst for several national movements demanding better quality of public services, more public transparency, measures for fighting corruption, among other claims. This would not have been possible, or at least would not have taken such magnitude, without the internet. However, it is clear that such mechanisms of democratic participation find limits. Factors such as the unequal distribution of access, the polarization of discourses, and the increasing appropriation of online space by the logic of state power and market capital. Another example of an obstacle to democracy is the increasing use of bots which conduct automatic messaging and posting on social netowrks in elections periods to promote certain political candidates. This practice, known as astroturfing, tries to simulate spontaneous political movements online by employing bots that can operate several profiles and mask their identity. Clearly, astroturfing brings even more complication to the already complex dynamics of an election, with its ability to artificially influence voters. There has also been some criticism of what has been called "couch-activism," referring to the preponderance of support to causes by manifestations that are restricted to the online environment. However, it must also be said that digital activism can break barriers that otherwise could inhibit political participation. Many people often have little time or energy to engage in activities after managing long hours and many time-consuming tasks in their routine. With the internet, citizens can participate in political discussions at any given time. Overall, the digital environment can provide various mechanisms to reduce human rights deficits and strengthen political participation. Sadly, the tech to promote the capacity of citizens to influence the course of politics are still underused. Governments and other institutions could establish different methods to enable the diffusion of the direct participation of its constituents in important decisions that will affect their lives. Brazil has applied great efforts to produce the civil rights framework for internet use. This law was sanctioned in 2014 and it is a large step towards better regulation of digital platforms. Internet governance is another focus, referring to the development and applications of shared principles, rules and procedures that concern the use of the internet. With more than two billion users around the world, the internet calls for a broader dialogue about its consequemces. The strong preference for a decentralized multistakeholder standard derives from the importance of the equal participation between players. Another field that has been the topic of many controversies refers to surveillance and cybercrime. The scandal involving digital espionage committed by the N.S.A. revealed in 2013, raised a red flag about the potential risks to privacy generated by the misuse of tech. This event has not only badly damaged the public's opinion and faith in authorities, but it has also significantly raised peoples' distrust that digital devices can keep users' information protected. This episode helps to stress the importance of the creation of strategies and structures that encourages transparency, especially to prevent such practices. Such activities should be subject to public scrutiny, at least to delineate its purpose and legal limits. Computer crimes have recently grown more sophisticated and consequently, harder to tackle. Therefore, we must develop new mechanisms to prevent those violations and pass legislation that encompasses cybercrime, in order to better deal with those occurrences. Under the advancement of tech, the key question in our countries is to ask how unchecked surveillance practice continue affecting the right to privacy of our populations. Privacy can no longer be reduced to the right of private space, but as one where everyone can take an active part in controlling the existing information of each individual; a legal manifestation of respect and protection which is guaranteed to each and every person, protecting dignity and human freedom, by recognizing within the holder, a power of control over their personal autonomy. The rapid evolution of digital tech has exposed these aspects of the right to privacy to permanent threats from around the world. The 2014 report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, deals specifically with the subject of privacy in the digital age, with a special focus on the problems arising from state surveillance and the lack of state transparency about it. 

Engaging Civil Society: Emerging Trends in Democratic Governance

                  This post is a summary of the book with the title above published at   https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Engaging-Civil-Society%3A-Emerging-Trends-in-Cheema-Popovski/54e99f7abc379218080a1d256c17ae88a4982850

                 Scholars and development practitioners recognize the centrality of governance capacity to achieve sustainable development, including the irradication of extreme poverty, environmental protection, access to basic services and livelihoods and the promotion of economic growth. Consequently, many developing countrieshave aimed to improve governance systems and processes to promote sustainable development. In developing countries, many factors can constrain governance capacity to formulate and implement development policies: elections are not always free, fair and regular; parliamentary processes may be dominated by the ruling elite without adequate interface between parliamentarians and constituents; checks and balances between the executive, judiciary and legislative branches may be inadequate; and weak rule of law may discourage foreign and domestic investments. High levels of corruption can further impede trust in goverment and inhibit the latter's capacity to bring about change. Other challenges can include weak local governments; a lack of inter-agency coordination where cross-sectoral interventions are needed; the magnitude of deficiencies in basic social services; and low levels of participation and engagement by civil society. The most commonly used definition of civil society is a sector of associations, or "a space between the family and the state where people associate across ties of kinship, aside from the market, and independent of the state." In the field of democracy assistance, the professor of political science at University of Stanford, Larry Diamond, defined civil society as "the realm of organized social life that is voluntary, self-generating, self-supporting, autonomous from the state, and bound by a legal order or set shared rules. It is distinct from society in general in that it involves citizens acting collectively in a public sphere to mutual goals, make demands on the state, and hold state officials accountable." The increasing impact of civil society on the governance of global institutions can be partly attribute to the deficiencies of democracy today, especially in developing countries. Several factors have created a vacuum: low levels of citizen participation, inadequate representation and weak mechanisms for accountability. Civil society organizations (CSO) provide information and structure for citizens to become further engaged in governance. For such purposes, CSOs have evolved to work transnationally and focus on specific issues. Often the reform agendas of donor countries and global CSOs are complementary. Both focus on promoting transparency and simplification of processes of global governance. In recent years CSOs have expanded in terms of their role, number, size, activities, areas and influence. The current and upcoming challenges for their continuing contributions to effective democratic governance are: the need for vertical and horizontal coordination; the need to improve legitimacy; trends towards improved organizational accountability; and need for capacity development. The role of CSOs at the global level has changed and are now vital actors in global governance, which includes normative intergovernmental processes that deal with issues of development, security, human rights and disarmament. Global CSOs now play a key role in the definition and establishment of international norms and standards, that are mutually agreed upon by members of international organizations, and then communicated to the national levels, where CSOs can advocate , pressuring governments to improve service delivery and access, as well as monitoring and assessing government policies and practices. CSOs also promote democratic governance by increasing the transparency of actions, promoting anti-corruption and accountability initiatives. Through these roles, CSOs have become increasingly influential in determining the global discourse. They now generate and disseminate data, provide their analysis and allow for a greater heterogeneity of viewpoints to debates. This awareness and coordination must take place both vertically and horizontally in order for CSOs to be most effective in fulfilling their stated policy objectives. Forging mutually reinforcing alliances and partnerships between global and national CSOs has strengthened CSOs engagement. Global civil society has been instrumental in global advocacy of developemnt, security and human rights issues and in increasing funding sources and flows outside government control. Civil society have been playing a vital role in providing an alternative channel of information to citizens and improving access to services. In coming years, a key obstacle to be overcome by CSOs concerns the issue of their legitimacy. As these organizations come to play an increasingly significant role in policy implementation and assessment, the question of their legitimate moral authority will come into play. This book acknowledges an increasing trend towards reinforcing the legitimacy of CSOs through strategies that improve their transparency, accountability and credibility to the public. Six types of legitimacy must be addressed: legal, normative, political, technical, associational and cognitive. Different approaches have been tried to strengthen this legitimacy: transparency mechanisms, annual reports, audited accounts, reporting and disclosure systems, participation mechanisms, evaluation mechanisms, and complaint and redress mechanisms. In conclusion, civil society is now playing a vital role in stimulating democratic change in many ways: direct involvement at different stages of the electoral process, including voter education and electoral monitoring; engagement with parliamentarians to communicate concerns of citizens; the provision of paralegal aid and other support mechanisms for access to justice; access to media to highlight abuses of power; the protection of rights; supporting the independence of the judiciary; and holding officials accountable to improve access to services. However, in order to ensure that they remain effective advocates of the public good, they must strengthen their linkages with other organizations, address issues related to their legitimacy, strengthen accountability and improve capacities.