|
||||||||
|
Workshop Proceedings The Chair of Studies in Canadian Citizenship and Human Rights sponsored a two day workshop on Human Rights and Information Technology which was held on April 18 and 19 at Holy Cross House, St. Thomas University in Fredericton, New Brunswick. The objective of the workshop was to explore the impact of information technology on human rights, and how to better address related issues and concerns. The results of this workshop are to be taken up by the Board of the Chair of Studies in Canadian Citizenship and Human Rights as possible themes for a national or perhaps an international conference. The workshop was organized as a working group meeting with participants representing various sectors including government, university, industry, libraries and community groups. To enhance the discussions the number of invited participants was limited to 40. The organizing committee for the workshop included David Townsend (Faculty of Law, UNB), Anne Ryan (Community Access Program), Ron Byrne (Student Affairs, STU), David Roberts (Education, UNB), and Shauna MacKenzie (Chair in Canadian Citizenship and Human Rights, STU). There were 32 participants in attendance at the workshop (See Appendix D). Some participants had to decline because of conflicting commitments. The sitting of the legislature in New Brunswick affected the scheduling of invited government representatives. As well, there were some organizations which felt uniformed about the subject matter and were uncertain as to how they would be able to participate meaningfully in discussions. Although the workshop was not intended to have all members conversant with information technology and human rights, there was in some cases general unfamiliarity and the groups chose not to send anyone on their behalf. The program took place over two days. The agenda was designed to maximize time together in small group discussions to allow all participants to contribute their thoughts, ideas and concerns. Two guest speakers were invited to the workshop to give a presentation: Valerie Steeves from the Human Rights and Education Centre, University of Ottawa and Tom Riley from Riley Information Services, Toronto. After each guest speaker completed their presentation, workshop participants were divided into groups and asked to address specific questions. The planning committee had generally defined these questions in order to bring out a wide range of issues from the group and to ensure that all participants felt included in the discussions. As the participants came from widely different sectors it was necessary while in the small groups to have time available to explore these differing perspectives. By the end of the first day participants had identified general concerns and issues about the impact of technology on human rights. On the second day, workshop co-ordinator Debbie Castle had identified three major areas of concern: access, privacy and workplace. The participants were invited to select a theme to explore further specific issues related to that theme and to make suggestions regarding steps to be taken to address those issues. In conjunction with the working objectives of the workshop, these specific themes as well as the general concerns may become the themes for a conference. Background Discussion: Today, key human rights issues deal with the protection of the dignity of all persons. This basic right has been defined under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two related international covenants on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and Civil and Political Rights. Canadian human rights legislation is embodied in various documents at the both the provincial and federal levels. Federal legislation includes the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. At the provincial level human rights have ben defined within provincial human rights acts. The objective of this legislation is to not only ensure protection against the negative effects of discrimination, but to also achieve gender, racial, social and economic equality. Types of issues that have been addressed under human rights legislation include sexual harassment, sexual orientation, racism, religious intolerance, minority rights, and recognition of equal treatment of individuals with mental or physical disabilities. It is intended not only to promote tolerance but also respect for every individual's full exercise of rights within society. One area of major concern has been the right of minorities and cultural diversity. Issues related to minority rights include the right to speak the language of one's choice or to exercise cultural practices and not to be overstated by the majority. The expression of minority rights is diverse and has in some cases been expressly protected by legislation, such as the Official Languages Act in New Brunswick. Under international law the issue of minority rights has been addressed by instruments such as the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities. The full expression of the rights of minorities brings to the forefront of a discussion the relationship between groups and individuals. The covenant provides persons belonging to ethnic, religious or language minorities the right in common with other members of that group to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion or to use their own language. The significant aspect of the recognition of group rights is that the group must control its own destiny which should not be suppressed by state governments. As Professor McEvoy pointed out in his article entitled "Human Rights Protection in New Brunswick: An Overview" : The right of the minority to continue to exist is clearly stated in the Declaration which calls upon governments to 1) promote and protect the human rights of minorities including the right to receive and share information and ideas, and 2) respect the rights of persons belonging to minorities to preserve their identity and to participate effectively in the affairs of the state... The right to receive and share information and ideas is central to the promotion and protection of the language and culture of every minority (McEvoy, page 22 at 26). The manner in which minority rights are understood is complex and must be considered in the context of distinct cultural realities. Andrea Bear Nicholas forcefully argues in Responsibilities Not Rights: A Native Perspective that the full meaning of self-determination is not just defining rights for aboriginal communities and the notion of self-determination, but must also include understanding the impacts of colonialism and the elimination of cultural integrity in the name of rights defined by the majority (Bear Nicholas, page 32-42). The processes available include the proactive consideration of cases of violations under various acts and international declarations, as well as public education. In order for human rights values to be embraced there must be continuous reinforcement of the practice of human rights. However the implementation of human rights advocacy requires not only redress at the individual level, but there must also be continuous redress of how institutional changes are embracing human rights. Dr. Passaris noted in his discussion entitled Human Rights Commissions: A New Agenda For the 21st Century that more attention needs to be paid to the protection of human rights in the political and civil sphere but there must be attention paid to the economic, cultural and social spheres (Passaris, 114 at page 124). This will require more innovation and diligence to address the impact of the rapid changes being introduced by technology. Ghettoized workers who have been streamlined by traditional patterns of work may be further discriminated against through the wave of this technological information revolution. The main theme of the workshop was to examine how information technology is impacting the evolution of human rights, its development and solutions. Substantive Discussion: The two guest speakers challenged the participants to consider the potential for information technology to become a tool for advancing human rights and social development. They explored how to appreciate the opportunities available to communities and individuals to use information technology to address their local concerns while at the same time increasing awareness about shared with the wider global community. For Tom Riley, there were various factors that he felt needed to be considered about the new information age. The transformation of the next generation as more accepting of this technology will take place over time so that it may no longer be an issue. However, the transitional period is real and the effects of the changes must be addressed. Driving forces behind technological reform are complex, and the lessons learned by countries such as Singapore indicate future trends. First of all, the human resources of a country can be as important as the natural resources. Detailed national strategies are necessary in order to benefit fully from the information technology revolution. Smaller jurisdictions can react more quickly in times of dramatic change as there are often less entrenched bureaucracies and more sense of the need to change. It is clearly recognized that the interactive aspects of information technology will permit feedback from citizens regarding strategy proposal and progress. Riley emphasized that successful information technology enhances or extends those initiatives which we are undertaking today, which includes the advancement of human rights. However, human rights approaches and institutions developed after World War II must be reconsidered in light of the by pass potential of information technology. Particularly, participation and demands for access to information by public interest groups, concern about free speech, and privacy will become more prevalent. Within this context, Riley stressed that is essential to understand what information technology is. The facts and the content may not be as significant as the actual interactive elements. The opportunity for public participation may be greatly enhanced by information technology to promote democratic development beyond the institutional and political structures which now exist. The most significant impact of information technology is the creation of the world of cyberspace which is not limited by geography. The pervasiveness of information technology puts into question the significance of cultural experience. How cultural exchanges will be interpreted through technology is not being appreciated. How language, cultural distinctions, and developed customs will be accommodated through technology is unknown. Cyberspace pushes the boundaries of cultural experience and brings small places into the world sphere. Questions posed to Tom Riley: Q: Is it fair to say that there are different rules for cyberspace? A: Cyberspace is a different space which requires different rules. We can not separate ourselves from the technology but it does create a new domain with a new Magna Carta of rights, a new subset of rules. The nature of the rules themselves will be different as the nature of the world of information technology is different. Q: What is the reality and how do we address the gaps? A: Information technology is a cultural reality in which there will be different degrees of responses. The younger generation will take the lead and shape the approaches which may be taken. This generation will be more versed in techno-human existence. There will be institutional changes as people change through the use of information technology and human evolution must be accounted for. However, there will be older institutions which will not readily embrace the changes. Q: How can one take actions such as passing legislation to address the problems which will be encountered? A: There will be a need for laws if only to satisfy the conditions being set down by other jurisdictions such as the European market. There must be more attention paid to privacy issues and legislation to protect individuals. However, essentially legislation to protect individuals. However, essentially legislation is not primary, analogous to "grasping the morning fog". It is evident that the old rules do not apply. Q: Does technology truly support an egalitarian workforce? A: There is potential to use technology to strengthen representative elements and move to participatory/direct democracy which is presently being experienced in South Africa. The new phenomenon of community networks is a social experiment which has new potential. Being part of the decision making process is already more of a reality. Through technology, the ideals of change which advocated for more participation in the 60's may now be realised through technology. Guest speaker Valerie Steeves emphasized the human potential of information technology describing it as a place for interaction which opens up new dimensions for exchange and growth. Those who use the technology will have a decided advantage over those who do not. The advantages of information technology have direct educational, political and social consequences. Those without information technology will have a lower quality of life and may not be able to claim a share or benefit from the global resources. Access to a more global community will allow for greater exchange and understanding. Information technology offers great potential for protecting cultures within a global community, and will generally enhance diversity. To date, however, information technology has been male dominated and uses English as the predominant language for information exchanges. Consequently, information technology has been used by those who are advantaged to increase their share of the resources and to advance their democratic power and position. Access to the Internet has not been universal and most usage has been in North America, Europe and Australia. The implications for the poorer countries will be profound, with more disenfranchisement and marginalization. As such, barriers are more apparent for women, poor and cultural minorities. In another context, human rights issues can now be more directly addressed. For instance, hate literature is no longer invisible and may be more constructively redressed. Writers of hate literature may now be challenged directly and immediately by individuals and groups using information technology. Due to the pervasive and non-linear nature of information technology, it will be necessary to reconceptualize human rights problems and the structures addressing them. One of the major reforms must deal with the rules addressing human rights issues: Cyberspace demands a new rule base. For example, we have created laws and institutions to protect personal privacy on the assumption that those threats to privacy will come from governments or large corporations. In the past our key concerns focused on being left alone by government. Today, however, it is becoming clear that the real threats will come in a bottom up fashion rather than a top down, where private data will be gathered in a virtual fashion by individuals or small companies. Thus the old rules for controlling access to and collection of stored information are becoming irrelevant. Ms. Steeves concluded that there is not the same commonality to assist consensus building necessary to deal with the impacts of information technology. With no commonality, the process is more complex and the rules are more divergent. The challenge is to understand these impacts and to then address the substance of the rules and newly identified barriers. There is a need for new national strategies, such as a privacy policy, which contains principles and provisions relevant to an information age. Questions posed to Valerie Steeves: Q: Does information technology not promote neo-colonialism? A: Information technology will surprise all with its potential to enhance human resources, growth and creativity. At the Beijing forum there was wide use of technology to document and disseminate information to the global community. One of the main advantages will be support for cultural diversity within the community. Human development will be challenged to embrace such diversity and technology may assist this process greatly. Q: If the law does not respond what are the economic factors which must be considered? A: The legal approach is to control. Information technology is more economic based and marginalization is a factor. However information technology may be used to support countries which have few natural resources such as Bangladesh. Through information technology there may develop a more viable economy which strengthens human rights practices. Q: Is self-regulation valid? A: The technological phenomenon is changing so rapidly that the controls are not as realistic. Rather, the community itself is key, as well as the cultural influences. Free speech within the context of information exchange is critical. Conflicts will be resolved less by law at this stage and more by informal consensus through the medium of information technology. Q: Are codes viable? A: The European Union has set down regulations regarding the exchange of information which has become a bargaining power for further development. The human rights code does provide an infrastructure, but to date there is no commonality in the international context. The Information Advisory Council and its policy has provided a basis for dialogue which is the most valuable rule base at the time.
From the various working groups, the issues which were identified and reflected upon revolved around the following themes: Accessibility - The level of discussion about how accessibility was being perceived was not clear within the regional context and there was also the question of who is responsible for ensuring access. Defining IT - What is information technology and how is it expected to change in order to plan and give direction. Culture - Cultural identity is vulnerable and there seems to be limited redress, especially in the face of no rules. At the same time there may be more shared cultural expression. Cyberspace reality - Appreciating the global context and what is being made available in cyberspace is daunting. Quality of information - Quality of information may be secondary but what influence does it have? More attention must be given to teaching good skills of discernment and values. Specific Concerns Raised: Retraining - retraining that is suitable and meets the existing community needs. Critical Thinking - how to increase the level of critical thinking and develop the skills necessary to temper information overload. Privacy - appreciation that the meaning of privacy has changed radically. Free Speech - content is uncontrolled and free speech is more of at issue. Discernment of Information - discernment of information is more nebulous especially when there is no definitive community context or standards. Legislation - if there are no rules what can be expected to evolve and what are reasonable expectations for regulation. Human Dignity - loss of dignity is more prevalent and threatening. Marginalisation of people who are being further excluded from social structures is not being addressed. Colonialism - technology is another form of colonialism with no respect for local choices, freedom of choice or cultural integrity. Information technology does not respect intrinsic cultural integrity but can destroy many aspects of the culture. Cost for Technology - there is no obvious substantial review of the costs of information technology and its impacts. Monopolies seem inevitable with no control mechanisms in place. Global Reality - how do we plan or address intrusion when there are no boundaries. Loss of Culture - loss of culture is not being appreciated or valued. Loss of Jobs - loss of jobs is too much taken for granted with no proper transition. Barriers - issues related to equity are not being obviously addressed, although opportunities may be available. Fear - fear of change causes tension and reluctance to understand the full impact of information technology. Institutions - loyalty to sovereign state and institutions is reduced. The opportunities available through information technology were also recognised and articulated by the groups. The primary points identified were as follows: 1. Technology has great flexibility and creativity for human growth 2. Education may be restructured to take advantage of interactive learning with emphasis on basics 3. Opportunity to reinforce fundamental human rights 4. Accelerated learning is of value 5. Access is a powerful tool to wider knowledge base 6. Process of decision making is changing with more drive from grassroots 7. Jobs will open up 8. Flexibility of choosing workplace will enable other choices for quality of life 9. Reform the way of doing business with more opportunity for smaller entities 10. Anonymity in a larger community will be liberating 11. Small geographic places may become more sustainable
Privacy: With respect to privacy, the group considered the issues, concerns and opportunities and resolved that information technology has redefined privacy, and that this is not yet fully understood. The realization that technology is a tool itself but affects social definitions of values around privacy calls for a more directed discussion about privacy. If the present rules are not clear and the institutions for regulating are not certain than there must be more attention placed on the social perception of privacy and a consensus about the rules which must apply. New remedies must be considered and responsibilities redressed to set the tone for self-regulation. Participants proposed that in Atlantic Canada the first phase must be for governments to set policies. Three or four companies may be invited to examine how the policies will be applied in practice. This type of joint venture will enable more informed discussion about the meaning of privacy in the context of information technology. It was acknowledged that no one approach may work but that with greater appreciation of the nature of change and privacy interests, there may be more satisfactory solutions sought to affirm current social values about privacy.
There is a responsibility to deliver and to use information technology properly in order to ensure that accessibility has meaning for all sectors of society. However, what is proper is still evolving and may be founded in the parameters of social values and democratic participation, not just commercial expediency. It is extremely important that these values be reaffirmed. Barriers which exist need to be evaluated and addressed more directly. For example, information technology may offer persons with disabilities new opportunities. However, the struggle to ensure that persons with disabilities are included in all aspects of society should not be sacrificed, and steps must be taken to uphold this social commitment in the broader community and not just the Cyberspace community. The opportunities information technology offers for expanding participation of different sectors of the community. as well as enhancing community development is positive. However, the drive to have technological accessibility to information must be guided by parameters based on values. Broader social objectives and reinforcement of human rights must be more fully integrated in the development and assessment of information technology initiatives. Members of the workshop emphasized that communities must be respected. In particular, the cultural character of distinctive communities must be negated. Workplace: The major concern about the impacts of Information Technology on the workplace in the Atlantic Provinces reflected the current regional economic pressures. In particular, the experience of marginalization, loss of jobs, promotion of more work at home with no protection, domination of culture, underemployment rather than substantial employment development, and a breakdown of the social context of work. It was acknowledged that mobility and new job opportunities will replace the present work model. Greater distribution of benefits may result if technology is applied discretely. However, there must be attention given to arbitrating human rights and needs in the workplace which have been changing under the rapid introduction of information technology. The International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights was proposed as a model for setting down new rules to define the values which must be upheld in the face of the changing workplace dynamics. The group agreed that these new rules must be defined as the social costs are too high. There must be more constructive thought given to the reconceptualization of the workplace and the value of work, Just as issues relating to privacy have changed, so too must the concept of work be redefined and revalued within appropriate standards and labour codes. Training must be appropriate and respectful of the work and the social milieu of the worker. Education must also reflect the changing face of work, but not at the cost of the basic fundamentals of education. The group emphasized that access to information technology in the workplace must be universal. Where there are sectors of the community who are being systematically denied access, both discriminatory practices and barriers must be identified and addressed. Challenges: The collective thinking of the workshop participants brought out the experience and skills of individuals with broadly based backgrounds. The opportunities of information technology are real but the nature of its positive contributions are being debated. The consensus was that there are human rights which have been affected significantly by the adoption of information technology, that issues must be addressed now. However, to deal with the effects of information technology there needs to be a better understanding of the cyberworld phenomenon. It was acknowledged that many members do not appreciate the wide ranging nature of technology and its functions. As there is more familiarity with the phenomenon of information technology, the consequent social responses to the impacts of it will become more apparent. The opportunities are real and positive. However, it was argued that just as information technology provides creative challenges to converge information and personal use, there is a need to identify the absence of checks and balances. This must be addressed immediately so that the benefits are maximized and the potential short comings are addressed. This polarity of balancing the opportunities with the responsible measuring of the use of the tools is the real challenge. Information technology has affected the human rights of members in society, as well as the process for protecting those rights. The impacts, however, are not easily identified. Technology is a reflection of our own humanity and the tool must be tempered by the rules and responsibilities which are embodied in the meaning of human rights, defined by the community. Human rights concerns are not being fully addressed because the implementors have not included the wider group of users. The workshop did not propose solutions or strategies. However, the workshop did provide a much needed forum for discussions and exchanges by representatives from a wide cross section of society through out the Atlantic region. Workshop participants agreed that there must be more deliberate discussions about the impact of information technology on human rights. The limitations of the present laws protecting human rights must be further explored and discussed at the tables where decisions to advance opportunities through information technology are being made. Continued education about human rights is of the highest priority as many of the issues related to information technology may be addressed through a high level of social consciousness about human rights. Information technology provides greater opportunities to interact, but the nature of these interactions must be continually nurtured by the values within local and global communities which respond to the fundamental values upheld by human rights. Most importantly, if information technology is to become more socially cohesive, then we need to establish a strong and deliberate partnership between humanity and technology.
|
|||||||
 |
© 2007 Atlantic Human Rights Centre, St. Thomas University |
|||||||
