Re: [hrpc] Censorship

[Jens Finkhaeuser <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

Thank you for such a balanced response! I intended to sit back a bit, but this statement is one I almost wholeheartedly agree with, maybe seemingly in spite of what I have previously been arguing.

Two small points here:

On Friday, March 18th, 2022 at 13:19, Terzis, Petros <[e-mail]> wrote:

> However, legitimacy gaps are resolved by state actors acting under the rule of law and by following a particular process of national/international consultation and political deliberation with civil society.

As I understand it, the primary purpose of the proposed entity would be to facilitate this deliberation by formalizing the diverse opinions expressed here into a process all (most) can support. I do not read the proposals as this entity working independently of politics or civil society, but to assist in the resolution finding process.

> But the constitutive conditions for such creation cannot be properly discussed during a war.

While I am inclined to agree with this for the reasons raised, it is also the case that without a crisis at hand, there is no need for such a body, which means we run the risk of having the same conversation during the next crisis.

Personally, I see middle ground between rushing into something hastily and postponing it indefinitely, which is to focus immediately on discussing the criteria by which most could find it acceptable.

Jens