Freedom of Expression on the Internet liberates human thought and broadens humanity in sharing ideas, insight, and experiences worldwide. Intellectual expansion, cultural awareness, political understanding, and social compassion are facilitated through the breadth of information available on-line. While few governments would contest the immeasurable power of the Internet to stimulate civil and political participation, measures are being taken to impose restrictions that inherently threaten free speech. To varying degrees, Human Rights Watch (HRW),”Censorship on the Internet”, and The Global Internet Liberty Campaign (GILC) address government attempts at Internet censorship. Further, these sites outline the limitations of such attempts, and illustrate the immediate and possible future implications of governmental violations to the international human right to freedom of expression. With the belief that free expression on the Internet enhances democracy and human culture, these sites advocate the elimination of government restrictions on the free flow of on-line information.

 

            Human Rights Watch (http://www.hrw.org/wr2k/Issues-04.htm),notes that although governments worldwide have recognized the difficulties of censoring the Internet, legislative proposals continue to threaten free speech. Specifically, many governments have – with varying degrees of success – implemented filtering and blocking technologies to limit on-line activity. Vividly illustrating government intervention of Internet activities are the examples of Bahrain, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. In all cases, Internet service providers blocked web sites on the basis of their content. Further, Proxy

Servers such as the ones in the U.A.E and Saudi Arabia could be employed to track Web sites visited by specific computer terminals and for how long.

 

            In addition, HRW acknowledged government attempts of Internet monitoring and surveillance. Referencing ECHELON (part of the UKUSA spy system), the Dutch Parliament’s Telecommunications Act, India’s License Agreement Provision of Internet Service, etcetera, HRW clearly made its case that the right to privacy via electronic communication has been undermined.

 

            While the HRW did not address the limitations of government attempts of Internet censorship, it did highlight the immediate and possible future implications of such restrictions. In the event of wide spread deployment of filtering and blocking technologies, sweeping restrictions would be placed on adults providing or gaining access to material deemed inappropriate for minors. In addition HRW notes the future possibility that Internet providers and telecommunications companies in many countries could be forced into facilitating government agencies in circumventing national privacy laws. In building special data taps into their servers, government monitoring of e-mails and Web pages sent to or from their servers would be possible.

 

            Quoting James Exon, Bud Hayes’ “Censorship of the Internet” site (http://www.qvctc.commnet.edu/student/BudHayes/censor.html) opens with the statement that; “The information super highway is a revolution that in years to come will transcend newspapers, radio, and television as an information source. Therefore, I think this is the time to put some limits on it.” As the site indicates through its links to the American Bill of Rights and The Communications Decency Act of 1996, the American government indeed attempted to impose Internet restrictions. In doing so, First Amendment Rights were to be deemed void for on-line activities.

 

            Appropriate to the libertarian nature of the web, this site offered a “Censorship Resource Guide” that provided users with “Alternatives to Government Censorship” and listed freedom fighters or “Organizations Participating in Lawsuits against the Government.” The site further facilitated the political participation among users by offering access to the “Pro’s” and “Con’s” of Censorship Protest Activities. Referencing Charles Bradlaugh, a 19^th Century British Political Activist, in his statement: “Better a thousandfold abuse of free speech than denial of free speech”, this site eloquently argues for the elimination of government censorship of the Internet.

 

            The Global Internet Liberty Campaign (http://www.gilc.org/speech/report/) is a key proponent that advocates the elimination of prior on-line censorship. GILC’s site notes that the Internet has proven to demonstrate its profound capacity to promote democracy. Illustrating the means in which the net has facilitated participation in the political process, and expanded access to government information, GILC clearly reveals the power of the Internet to “politicize” users. Moreover, indicating how the net has strengthened civil society through fostering networks among individuals and broadened access to traditional media, GILC leaves little to question in the Internet’s capacity to enhance democracy and human culture.

 

            In contrast with the aforementioned sites, the GILC vividly defines the futility of government attempts to impose restrictions on Internet content and accessibility. The creation of “mirror sites”, for example, is one means of overcoming government censorship. In addition, in the event that a Proxy server blocks access to a Web site containing “objectionable” material, Web site operators can either change their address or the restricted user can dial into a server outside their country to access the desired information.

 

            Consistent with the previously mentioned sited, the GILC notes that government attempts to impose Internet censorship violates International and Regional agreements that propose to uphold Universal free expression. Further, the site argues that filtering; rating and labeling systems jeopardize the free flow of information and could be employed by governments in violating human rights. Stating that one region’s restrictions on Internet content compromises the rights of all Internet users worldwide, the GILC calls for uncensored on-line communications.

 

            No other medium had paralleled the competence of the Internet to deploy and receive information. Central to the nature of a democracy is the capacity of citizens to freely express and exchange social, political, economic, and cultural information. Consistent will all mentioned sites is the sentiment that until the Internet is free from government censorship, the notion of democracy will remain undermined.