The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), with its 56 member countries made up of 1 billion people, is the “world's largest regional security organization.” And it really doesn't like Internet censorship.

A new OSCE report on "Freedom of Expression on the Internet" (PDF) takes a hard line on all things Internet, issuing conclusions at odds with the practices of many of its most powerful member states, including France and the US. Net neutrality? Every country needs it. “Three strikes” laws that and in Internet disconnection? Disproportionate penalties for minor offenses. Internet access? It's a human right.

The report was prepared by Yaman Akdeniz, a law professor at Istanbul Bilgi University in Turkey, and it's a scorcher—coming to many of the same conclusions reached by UN Special Rapporteur Frank LaRue last month. Reports, even when they come from organizations like OSCE and the UN, seem unlikely to alter France's stance on Internet disconnections as response to online copyright infringement, or the United States' newfound appreciation of the need for Internet site blocking. As for countries like Belarus and Kazahstan—well, the chances they will suddenly agree with Akdeniz and LaRue are infinitesimal.

Still, the reports do document a growing high-level international perspective opposed to nearly all censorship and curtailment of Internet access, and in strong favor of making such access a universal human right.

Highlights from the report:

Network neutrality: It's "an important prerequisite for the Internet to be equally accessible and affordable to all. It is, therefore, troubling that more than 80 percent of the participating States do not have legal provisions in place to guarantee net neutrality. Finland and Norway stand out as best practice examples Users should have the greatest possible access to Internet-based content, applications or services of their choice without the Internet traffic they use being managed, prioritized, or discriminated against by the network operators."

"Three strikes": "The increased use of so-called 'three-strikes' legal measures to combat Internet piracy is worrisome given the growing importance of the Internet in daily life This disproportionate response is most likely to be incompatible with OSCE commitment on the 'freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.'"

Internet kill switch: "Existent legal provisions allow several OSCE participating States to completely suspend all Internet communication and 'switch off' Internet access for whole populations or segments of the public during times of war, states of emergency and in cases of imminent threat to national security. Reaffirming the importance of fully respecting the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the OSCE participating States should refrain from developing, introducing and applying 'Internet kill switch' plans as they are incompatible with the fundamental right to information."

Web blocking: "As blocking mechanisms are not immune from significant deficiencies, they may result in the blocking of access to legitimate sites and content. Further, blocking is an extreme measure and has a very strong impact on freedom of expression and the free flow of information. Participating States should therefore refrain from using blocking as a permanent solution or as a means of punishment Blocking of online content can only be justified if in accordance with these standards and done pursuant to court order and where absolutely necessary. Blocking criteria should always be made public and provide for legal redress."