4 ms·
Whether or not internet access really is a human right isn’t really all that important. Human rights can be and are frequently limited or taken away. Prisoner h
by ugh 15y ago
Whether or not internet access really is a human right isn’t really all that important. Human rights can be and are frequently limited or taken away. Prisoner have no freedom of movement, for example.
When two human rights conflict, one or the other has to give. That’s just normal and exactly what judges are there for to decide.
What we are talking about here is someone who used to be in jail. That is a much more severe limitation of his human rights than merely no being allowed to access the internet. People who are prosecuted end up in jail because they might flee, but also because they might otherwise be able to manipulate or destroy evidence.
That is in no way automatically a violation of human rights, at least not on balance. You would have to know how exactly the judge justified the decision.
- Joakal 15y agoThat's understandable. There was a bail and thus, the charged person has limited freedom again. However, by attempting to order someone with an Internet proficiency to avoid the Internet is impossible due to electronics, wirless, government services, postal, etc. Some people even live off the Internet. You can enforce restriction of freedom of movement. However, as I said, it's too impractical to restrict Internet access and would only serve to restrict honest people. The greater concern is that other people to see the judge as incompetent since it's an unenforceable order. It then raises questions on whether the judge can understand the technical issues with the trial, whether Dotcom will get a fair trial.