Internet use in the developing world is increasing at a dramatic rate, and declaring internet access a basic human right will serve as an important guide (I'm not sure if "guide" is the correct word here. Maybe something like "an additional impetus for further growth") to that growth, in deterring internet and information censorship, as well as encouraging the prioritization of information services infrastructure to bring them to parity with more developed countries. You might also want to consider making two sentences here. Something like: "internet use in the developing world is increasing at a dramatic rate, and declaring internet access a basic human right will serves as an important impetus for further growth. By deterring internet and information censorship, as well as encouraging the prioritization of information services infrastructure to developing countries, the declaration of internet access a human right will help ensure greater enjoyment of this right." While the internet is a tool for communication, our freedom to information is only as good as the access to sources, and our ability to communicate. Every denial of such tools harms the right to information. The internet is already the best communication tool in terms of access to information and audience reach, and it is becoming increasingly indispensable, as second nature as speaking itself as indispensable as speech itself . We should therefore regard declare it as a fundamental right vital to the future development of (global?) society.

I think you're asking a really interesting question in this paper, but it would benefit from focusing more specifically on the right at stake (wow I sound like Scalia in Michael H.). Is it the right to have some access to the internet, the right to have a fast connection, the right to have cheap internet, the right to information that happens to be on the internet, all of these, or something totally different?

I think it might also benefit if you pushed on internet censorship a little more. A lot of people who don't have internet access live in countries where they are not allowed to have any, or complete, access. Another interesting area that you might want to think about exploring (you raise it in the conclusion as well) is how declaring access a human right could improve access in developing countries. Exploring both of these topics might be a good idea.

One last point - make your argument more forcefully. It's a very good argument that has a lot of merit, but instead of relying on what other people have said about it to passively make your points, just say it yourself and back it up with statistics or other arguments.

I hope some of this makes sense. I've been told that when I edit I try too much to turn the author's voice into my voice, so I won't be offended it you take whatever is useful and just forget the rest. It's a very interesting topic and has lots of potential. Let me know if you have any questions.