International Bill of Rights


The biggest problem with discussion of moral issues that arises in a medium like the Internet, is that there is little agreement about what moral theories ought to be applied to such a discussion. One scholar might wish to discuss these issues in purely utilitarian terms, but such a discussion is unlikely to be well received by another scholar who wishes to discuss that same issue in Kantian terms, and both are likely to disagree with yet another scholar who wishes to discuss the same issue in terms of an ethic of care. Such problems are only magnified by the global nature of the Internet; in order to come to any satisfactory answer to these problems, it is necessary to rely on some global, or near-global, theory of ethics. There is really only one moral standard in the world today that fits with the global nature of the Internet, and that is the International Bill of Rights. Assented to by the General Assembly of the United Nations, [ 2] the International Bill of Rights consists of three documents: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR). The International Bill of Rights was reaffirmed by 171 countries of the world at the World Conference on Human Rights held in Vienna in June 1993. At that time the United Nations consisted of 184 member states, so the reaffirmation of the UDHR by 171 nations represents the overwhelming majority of the nations (and peoples) of the world. Such international agreement to a common moral standard makes these human rights instruments an excellent tool for assessing the issues raised in the use of an international medium such as computing and the Internet. Both the UDHR and the CCPR assert that people have a right to privacy. Article 12 of the UDHR states:

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 12)

Article 17 of the CCPR is virtually identical:

  1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.

  2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

    (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 17)

The biggest difference between these two documents is that the UDHR is merely an aspirational document, whereas the CCPR is an international treaty, legally binding upon its signatories, who are thus committed to taking steps to ensure that the rights enumerated in the CCPR are incorporated into domestic law. As of November 2003, 151 nations had ratified this treaty, thus agreeing to be bound by its standards. Such international agreement gives good grounds for asserting that there is a widely recognized right to privacy, and suggests that an attempt to deal with the issue of privacy and the Internet ought to utilize the notion of such a right. I would also suggest that, given its widespread international acceptance, any attempt to deal with practical problems of privacy on the Internet also ought to give due recognition to the International Bill of Rights and its interpretation, to which so many nations have agreed to be bound.

[ 2] In fact, recognition and promotion of human rights is central to the mission of the United Nations, being mentioned in Article 1 of the United Nations Charter.




Electronic Monitoring in the Workplace. Controversies and Solutions
Electronic Monitoring in the Workplace: Controversies and Solutions
ISBN: 1591404568
EAN: 2147483647
Year: 2005
Pages: 161

flylib.com © 2008-2017.
If you may any questions please contact us: flylib@qtcs.net