OAS Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression Catalina Botero thinks that government should refrain itself from setting any rules which restrict web access and contents (Handout photo)

Interview / Catalina Botero, OAS Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression

The Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, Organization of American States (OAS), Colombian Catalina Botero, is afraid that more democratic and participatory mechanisms than Internet can hardly be found. For this reason, she added, States should maximize citizens' active participation in the web and prevent the adoption of rules which restrict web access or contents, except for extreme cases of banned information under international treaties. "Online expression should receive the same protection as any other means of expression," she said.

Is the Internet a free space where everything is valid?

The Internet content is protected under Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights. This regulation also sets allowable limits to freedom of expression. That is, the right to expression on the Internet is subject to restrictions, but these should be imposed in strict conformity with the right to freedom of expression and, particularly, allowable restrictions under international treaties.

Which national regulations are acceptable, which do not collide with citizens' rights, such as freedom of expression and freedom of information?

Under international treaties, previous censorship is expressly prohibited. In this regard, rapporteurs from all regions have noted that the establishment of uncontrolled filters by final users, imposed either by the government or a private supplier, is kind of previous censorship and, therefore, it violates international treaties. In addition, like in other mass media, invoking the right of society to be "truly informed" to substantiate a system of previous censorship intended to remove any information deemed as false by the censor is unacceptable. The establishment of prior requirements, such as public registry or the like, as a condition to access the Internet is also inacceptable. Blockade by the State of websites for social, historical or political reasons is inacceptable too. Now, therefore, illegal contents on the Internet -child pornography or solicitation to genocide, for instance- should be penalized with accurate laws aimed at the individual directly responsible for the content, instead of harming the Internet infrastructure. Last, the Internet may be controlled only by public agencies shielded from any political and business interference.

Which international legal instruments list the rights and duties on the use of the Internet?

Internet free use and access should be ensured like other kinds of expression, taking into account the Internet special nature. Therefore, international treaties apply. There are also some specific standards on the Internet and freedom of expression, such as the 2005 joint declaration of special rapporteurs on freedom of expression of the OAS, the United Nations and the (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe) OESC.

Where does the responsibility of the media outlet start? Where, for instance, does the responsibility of a user who takes part in a discussion forum start?

People should not be held accountable for any Internet content not authored by them, unless they have adopted the content as of their own and have refused to observe a court decision to remove such content. In order to protect the Internet potential as a means to exercise freedom of expression, it is important not to hold accountable a website which allows third parties to freely express themselves for the content produced by these people, provided that the website is not responsible for the illegal content and promptly acts to remove it upon knowing of said information. In no event Internet general obligations should be set in order to make service suppliers monitor the information issued or stored by them.

Translated by Conchita Delgado

Source:ElUniversal.com