Acta is only a very triple case for undemocratic international standardization. It is time to question the monopoly of governments about intergovernmental negotiations
The so-called trading income for the evidence of product and brand piracy acta has finally arrived at the public. For international mass protests, tens of thousands have gone on the strain since the end of january. It was about hundred thousand on the 11th. February in germany. The online burger movement avaaz collected about two million protest records. The protests are just in time to prevent the agreement still to prevent.
It was already signed by most governments involved as well as the european union. On 26. January there was a rough ceremony in tokyo. Now the ratification is based on, ie the approval of the national parliaments and the european parliament. The agreement (pdf) enters into force for those contractors who deposit their instrument. At least six are needed. Due to the rights of the european parliament, which were stated by the treaty of lisbon, this must also agree with the eu.
The protests against acta rot turn the matter mainly around the spongy regulations "enforcement of intellectual property rights in the digital environment", how it is called in the contract. The mistrust is huge, because the negotiations have been conducted by the us, canada, japan, the eu and the other governments involved since 2008 excluding the public.
From the negotiating rooms reached again and again clear after drabs. One or the other negotiation document and one or the other design came to the public, without however that the authenticity could be permanently confirmed. The worst was too far. Everything seemed to be duties, enforcement, punishment, but certainly not to go to the rights of users.
It struck, for example, "three strikes"-model should be made in the contract for international standard. As a result, the internet access of a user was incrigenced by the third party against copyright on the internet. A representative of the motion picture association of america (mpaa), the lobby association of the american film industry, is supposed to have allegedly suggested the construction of a censor infrastructure for the internet at an acta round of negotiations in mexico, which will also be used to be used to "dangerous websites like wikileaks" swab off. The example, so was speculated, had been caught by the mpaa representative to make the idea of the governments particularly tasty.
To such provisions it has not come in the contract. The text was softened as a precaution, say critics. With the agreement, however, became "acta committee" used "recommendations for implementation and execution" hand over the convention and "guidelines for exemplary procedures" should say goodbye.
Without a doubt, acta is a failed and unbalanced, perhaps a potentially fundamental rights infringement of faceless governance advice, which hide somewhere in the feather-proof ministries. Already alone because of the scandalosis manner, as acta was negotiated, the contract should be rejected by the national parliaments and the european parliament.
Instead of parliaments and civil society the legal industry at the table
With a ratification of the acta agreement, parliaments were also descended the scandalosen negotiation process and agree to their own dismissal, which in this case has become so obvious. Not enough that governments have negotiated the contract against all sinds, without any significant consultation with the public or parliaments – and that, although the european parliament is almost repeated almost from the beginning and demanding its inclusion and more transparency with ever more drastic words has.
Instead of elected representatives as well as independent experts of civil society and science, representatives of striking lobbying and coarse companies were specifically invited and invited within the framework of silencing agreements to bring their regulatory and vendors. The us department of commerce sent acta designs to the already mentioned mpaa, sony pictures entertainment, time warner, the international intellectual property alliance, the recording industry association of america or coalition for intellectual property rights. The european commission likes the european parliament. The rapporteur in the european parliament, squad arif, after signing the contract by the eu from protest against the entire procedure.
With the so-called "plurilateral negotiations" in addition, technically stated international organizations such as the world organization for intellectual property or world trade organization were circumvented. The acta negotiating partners have ensured that unwilling governments are not on board at the talks.
After consulting the canadian professor michael spirit, which is one of the best connoisseurs of matter, her calculus was that the governments excluded from the process can no longer fight against a join. The acta regulations are tailored to you in some areas such as the handling of generic drugs. India is therefore already a long against acta on the barricades.
Interstate negotiations as a threat to democracy
Acta is a particularly three-step case for an undemocratic and intransparent concluded international contract. Acta refers to a basic problem. The division of diplomacy is still exclusive in the hands of governments. They have been added to the historically grown privilege to represent the state in the intergovernmental relations to the suburban. They alone are to negotiate the intergovernmental contract.
In the past, the counterpart of foreign policy turned mainly to war and peace, yes also for trade relations. These questions were up to the middle of the 20th. Century still relevant. Already in 1963, however, carl friedrich von weizsacker has interpreted the concept of world internal policy in order to describe the largest intervention of political problems.
The separation between internal and radiation policy has become an absurd anachronism, which threatens democracy. In the case of more and more political materials needed internationally, parliaments that have lost nothing after the classic idea in the aufenpolitish area are becoming stronger demonstrated. The representatives are provided by the governments against completed facts, as now at acta. The contract is ready, yes by most governments even signed. What remains the parliaments now is to either agree or reject.
As the political scientist klaus dieter wolf has argued correctly before about ten years, the executive can strongly increase its weight in the domestic force game by shifting decisions into the intergovernmental area and thus eliminates the domestic control and discussion.
Exactly that happens. Lobbyists have understood the game and start where they can influence influence, by name directly during the negotiations. Behind the sealed deals of international negotiations you will find optimal conditions. The governments can then be put on the convenient position that international specifications that they have formulated themselves by itself had to be implemented. As a rule, parliaments agree to the pre-existing volker law to destabilize their own government. They are reduced to abnick organs.
Globalize the democracy
The decision on international regulations may no longer be allowed to leave the underhereholders of government-appropriatives alone. Parliamentarians must be included as equal participants in intergovernmental negotiations. About people’s representative can be created. You are responsible for your elections.
In fact, there is already a strong trend towards the cooperation and involvement of parliaments and parliamentarians in the international area. There are already over 100 international parliamentary institutions, of which around 70 have emerged since 1999. The most developed organ of this kind is the direct elected european parliament.
Interestingly, it was also the european parliament, which has shown a strong interest in acta and has poured into transparency. In fact, it seems to be in the area of the possible way that the european parliament rejects the acta agreement. If the european parliamentarians accept their demolition in the negotiation process to acta, they create a praised dates and just undermine them until they were able to approve. For the national parliaments, this principal question is no longer. With them is the self-entertainment business as usual.
It is also noteworthy that the trend just mentioned the important global organizations has not yet reached. Neither the united nations nor at the international truth fund, the world trade organization or the world bank, there is any form of parliamentary organ.
So why not create a global parliamentary assembly that turns on at international questions? She first had no decision-making powers. The right to be involved in intergovernmental negotiations and to look at the international organizations on their fingers is already a profit. In june, the european parliament challenged exactly that (eu sets un world parliament on the agenda. The governments, whether democracies or car courts, did not want to know about it. No wonder.
Meanwhile, the next problem attracts the internet community. Russia, china and other countries like brazil, india and sudafrika want to bring the internet under the control of a new un authority. In november, china, russia, tajikistan and uzbekistan introduced a text at the un general assembly, which should be determined that the "political status of internet-related public affairs the souverane law of states" may be. And not about icann (cold war in cyberspace or constructive dialogue?To). One should not sue the mistake that the united nations under the present conditions democratic access. It does not do that.