April 15, 2010 Harvard Law Record Page 3
B
Y
S
TEPHANIE
Y
OUNG
TheD.C.CourtofAppealsruledlastTuesdaythattheFCCdoesnothaveauthoritytoregulatebroad- bandInternetserviceproviders,grantingComcasttheabilitytoshapeitsconsumers’useofcertainwebap- plications.ThisisthemostrecentdevelopmentinastringofcourtbattlesthatstemsfromComcast’sprac-ticeofdelayingorblockingcertaintypesofInternettrafficwithoutdisclosingthedetailstoitscustomers.Whileothercompaniesmayalsoengageinthesame practices,Comcast,asoneofthebiggestandmost powerfulISPs,setsthestandardfortheindustry.Thesagabeganin2007,whenoneComcastcus-tomerwhohadextensivenetworkexperiencefiguredoutthatcertainapplicationswerebeingblocked.HerealizedthathisInternetconnectionshutdownwhenhetriedtosharehisfavoritemusic,publicdomain barbershopquartetrecordings,viapeer-to-peerappli-cations.BecauseComcastdoesnotdisclosewhatin-formationtheyblockandwhentheydoit,lesssophisticatedusersmaynotknowthatproblemswiththeirInternetconnectionsareintentionallyinflicted bytheirISPs.TheElectronicFrontierFoundationandAssociatedPressinvestigated,anddiscoveredthatComcastpur- poselyslowedorblockedpeer-to-peerfilesharingap- plicationssuchasBitTorrent.Subsequently,specialinterestgroupFreePressfiledacomplaintagainstComcastwiththeFCCin2007basedonthispractice.FreePressassertedthatComcast’ssecrecyconstitutedadeceptivepracticethatshouldberegulated.Com-castexplainedthatthiswasmerelya“networkman-agementpractice,”toensurethatnooneconsumer tooktoolargeashareofitsbandwidthawayfromothercustomers.However,itfailedtoregulatesomeotherapplicationsthatusedmore,andrestrictedother applicationsthatusedlessbandwidth.In2008,astheresultofagencyadjudication,theFCCorderedComcasttodisclosefulldetailsofitsnetworkmanagementpracticesandcreatepubliclyavailableplansfornewandnondiscriminatoryprac-tices.ComcastappealedthisfindingonthegroundsthattheFCCdidnothaveauthoritytoregulateunder its“ancillary”authority.ComcastalsoclaimedthattheFCCcouldnotmakethisdecisionthroughadju-dicationinsteadofconductingaformalrulemaking proceeding.IntheApril6decision,theD.C.CircuitfoundthattheFCCmisuseditsauthorityinregulatingComcast’snetworkmanagementpractices,effectivelyallowingComcasttoinhibittransmissionofwhatevercontentitdeemstroublesometoitsnetworks.FCCChairmanJuliusGenachowskisaidthatevendespitethisdeci-sion,hisagencywouldlookforothermeanstoprotectconsumerinterestsinbroadband.Astheappealwaspending,severalbillsintroducedinCongresssoughttoremedythisissuefromacon-sumerprotectionstandpoint.TheInternetFreedomPreservationAct,abillintroducedonJuly31oflastyear,includesenforcementprovisionsfornoncom- pliantISPsandcreateslawdirectlyratherthandele-gatingtotheFCCforrulemaking.Thisbilliscurrentlyincommitteebutwillprobablybereplaced bythemorerecentNationalBroadbandPolicy.TheBroadbandConsumerProtectionBill,introducedonMarch15,aimstopromotedisclosuretoconsumersof theactualtransmissionspeedstheirISPsachieve.TheactwouldspuranFCCrulemakingtoensurethat broadbandmarketingincludesclearinformationtoconsumersaboutwhatspeedstheycanrealisticallyexpect,andtoregulateISPs’marketingandservice procedures.TheFCCreleaseddetailsofitsNationalBroadbandPlan,apriorityoftheObamaadministration,onMarch16,statingmultiplegoalsofincreasingthenumberofAmericanswithbroadbandconnections,improvingcomputerandInternetliteracy,andmak-ingaccessmoreaffordable.ItremainstobeseenhowtheNationalBroadbandPlanwillcomportwiththeD.C.Circuit’sdecision.Unfortunately,therecentComcastdecisionmeansthattheFCCmaynothaveauthoritytoregulate.ThisdecisionlefttheFCCwithlesserregulatory poweroverbroadband,andconsumerswithfewer rightsagainsttheindustry.Inordertoensurethatconsumersreceivefairtermsandcompetitiveprices,eitherCongressorthecourtsneedtoreversethistrendandplacebroadbandsquarelyundertheFCC’sau-thoritytoregulate.
Comcast
DecisionThreatensNetNeutrality
D.C. Circuit Rejects F.C.C. Authority to Regulate Internet Carriers’ Controls on Data
B
Y
R
EBECCA
A
GULE
Afghanistan’sarduousroadtotheruleoflawcon-tinuestoencounterblockagesanddelays.InMarch,RebeccaGangandSaeeqShajjan,bothHarvardLawSchoolLL.Ms,whoworkedasdefenseattorneysinthecountry’snascentnewlegalregime,togetherwithJasteenaDhillon,afellowattheHarvardKennedySchool’sCarrCenterforHumanRightsPolicy,sharedtheirexperienceworkinginthecountry’slegalinsti-tutions.“Ifoundthatthepragmaticapproachwewerefol-lowingontheground,ifnotacompletemismatch,wasnotananswertothebreakdownoftheruleof law,”Dhillonsaid.UsingtheexampleofBosnia,shenotedthatpost-conflictjudicialinstitutionsaregen-erallynotequippedtodealwiththeuniquesituationstheyface.Dhillonprovidedabriefoverviewoftheissuesfac-ingAfghanistan’slegalsystem,includingtheinterac-tionbetweenAfghanistan’sformalandinformal justicesystems,bothbasedinSharia,andreflectingholdoversfromtheRomancivilandEnglishcommonlawsystems.WithinthiscontextthediscussiontoucheduponwhethertheinternationalcommunitycorrectlyunderstandsthechallengesAfghansfaceandwhetheritspresenceisahelporahindrance.Shefur-therexplainedthedifficultyindeterminingthecycleofpolicyinitiatives,astheymaybeginontheground,filteruptopolicymakersandthencirclebackdown.AnAfghanattorney,ShajjanworkedwiththeInter-nationalDevelopmentLawOrganizationandInde- pendentNationalLegalTrainingCenteratKabulUniversity.PriortoreturningtotheUnitedStatesfor herLL.M,Gangfocusedonlegalassistanceandac-cesswiththeNorwegianRefugeeCouncilandtheAfghanistanIndependentBarAssociation(AIBA).ShajjanrecountedrelevantaspectsofAfghanistan’shistory,notingattemptsatlegalandpoliticalreform.Rulingfrom1919to1929,relativemoderateAman-ullahKhancreatedthecountry’sfirstconstitutionandcompiledthepenalcode,as,accordingtoShajjan,“thestatetriedtomakejusticeaccessible.”Withthe1973coup,however,manyearliermiseriesreturnedtoAfghanistan.“Alltheworkthatwasdonebeforewasnullified,”Shajjansaid.Followingthe2001U.S.invasion,Afghanistanadoptedanewconstitution,whichenshrinedseveralhumanrights.Article31alteredthescenariofortheaccused,providingthat,“Uponarrest,ortoprovetruth,everyindividualcanappointadefenseattor-ney.”Withdefensecounselalmostararityinthecountry before,Shajjanrecalledenteringthecourtsofjudgeswhodidnotevenrecognizetheidea.Henotedthatthenewconstitutionalsoincludesaprohibitionontortureandanequalprotectionclause,andhecom- paredrightsonpapertotheireffective,realtimeim- plementation.Despitesomeshortfalls,andevenashenotedthatmanychallengesextendtotheentirecountry,Shajjanremainshopeful.“Iamoptimisticthatthingsarehap- pening,”hesaid,pointingtotheestablishmentoftheAfghanistanIndependentHumanRightsCommissionandtheElectionCommission.“Afghanistandoeshavecertainachievements.”OfGang,Dhillonsaid,“Weworkedinthesame placesatdifferenttimesandbothworkedwithAIBA.Inpostconflictcountries,weputalotofemphasison judges,
etcetera
,butforgetaboutdefencelawyers.”AfterspendingthelastfouryearsinAfghanistan,inpartasanadvisortothefirstAIBA,Gangexplainedherreasonsforsteppingbackintoacademia.“First,IcametoHarvardtogivemygrandparentstheyearofffrommelivinginAfghanistan,”shesaid.“Secondarily,becauseIcamehomefromworkevery-dayintears,orifnotintears,withthefeelingofhav-ingspentmydaybangingmyheadagainstthewall.”Ganghadbeguntoquestiontheappropriatenessof theAIBA’slawanddevelopmentapproachandwhetheritwouldsimplyentrenchmoredeeplytheveryjusticesectorproblemsitpurportedtosolve.Lawanddevelopmentemergedasadistinctfieldinthe1960sand1970s,Gangsaid,aspeopleaimedtomakeatransformationfromformalismtoinstrumen-talism.Issuesarose,however,whenwesternassump-tionswereappliedtodevelopingcountries.Inreactiontothisconcern,anewmodelhasbeeninrelieduponsincethemid-1970s.Inpractice,thesepoliceswereenforcedbythosewithaccesstolawyers,therebyre-inforcingtheinterestsoftheelite.“Theseiterationsofleveldevelopmentallcirclearoundthisoneconceptandsaythesamething,thatlocalsneedtodesigntheseprograms.Itsays,‘aslongaslocalsaredesigningtheseprojects,allofourprob-lemsaresolved’,”Gangsaid.WiththeBonnAgreementontheframeworkfor Afghanistan’spost-2001governmentmovingfor-ward,theInternationalBarAssociation(IBA)con-ductedafact-findingmissioninAfghanistan.Withoutstandardsfororregulationofthelegalprofession,andnostructuretoanswertheproblemsofdefenseattor-neys,itwasnearlyimpossibletoimplementArticle31.TheIBAsuggestedthecreationofanewinstitu-tion,whichledtotheAIBA’sformation.Gangsaid,“TheIBAcomesinandsays,thisisthesolution,wearegoingtosetupaframework;wearegoingtolookatinternationalbestpractices.ThenyouAfghansyoufillitin.”OpeningitsdoorsinJuly2008,theAIBAhasmetwithbothsuccessandfailure.Gangnotedtheaccom- plishmentofevenstaffingtheofficeandbeginningworkonnon-controversialcases.Bycontrast,AIBAserviceshavenotexpandedbeyondKabul,itlacksastrategicplan,anditcontinuestoavoidcontroversialadvocacy.“Alloftheproblemswesetouttofix,theyhavenotonlynotbeensolved,butthemechanismswesetuptosolvethemhaveensuredtheywon’tbesolved,”Gangsaid.ShajjantriedtotemperGang’sconcerns,saying“thisisthefirstyear,don’texpecteverythingfromthem.Theywilldothis.”Dhillonofferedanangleofrealismandprogress.“Whenyouareinthefieldyouknowthatyouarenotalwaysdoingitright,butyoujusthopethatitfits,andyoupushandyoupush.It’sgreattogobackanddothisreflection.”
Afghanistan:Successes,RoadblockstotheRuleofLaw
“Withdefensecounselalmostararityinthecountrybefore,Shajjanrecalledenteringthecourtsofjudgeswhodidnotevenrecognizetheidea.”
Add a Comment
This document has been featured!