<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font face="Verdana">I support this text by Joy...<br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Monday 10 June 2013 02:56 PM, joy
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:51B59BAB.9060406@apc.org" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- <br>
Hash: SHA1 <br>
<br>
Hi - sharing some ideas that came also from discussion with Frank
La Rue's office and my suggested edits relate to the last para,
the recommended action to the Council: - I think we have a 3
pronged approach to the call to action which is looking really
good:<br>
<br>
"We call on the Human Rights Council to act swiftly to prevent
creation of a global Internet based surveillance system by:<br>
1) convening a special session to examine this case 2) supporting
the recommendation of Mr La Rue that the Human Rights Committee
develop of a new General Comment 16 on the right to privacy in
light of technological advancements and 3) requesting the High
Commissioner to prepare a report a) formally asking states to
report on practices and laws in place on survellilance and what
corrective steps will they willl take to meet human rights
standards and b) examing the implications of this case in in the
light of the Human Rights Council endorsed United Nations Guiding
Principles on Business and Human Rights, the “Protect, Respect and
Remedy” Framework of A/HRC/RES/17/4.<br>
<br>
Joy<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 10/06/2013 8:47 p.m.,<br>
Joana Varon wrote:<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">> Sure, Parminder. Lets remove
company names. <br>
> And thanks for the comprehension. <br>
><br>
><br>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:38 AM, parminder <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"><mailto:parminder@itforchange.net></a>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hi All<br>
><br>
> IT for Change will endorse this .... (There are some
changes I would have liked to propose but due to the urgency of
the issue i would not do it now. Certainly the names of the
companies involved should have not been mentioned in the
statement. Can we still do it?.)<br>
><br>
> I am sure some of you may already be in contact with
him but if not Philippe Dam with Human Rights Watch may be a
useful person to talk to on this. i am cc-ing the email to him.
He is attending the HR Council meeting. Wonder if Joy is still
there?<br>
><br>
> Best, parminder<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Monday 10 June 2013 10:07 AM, Deborah Brown wrote:<br>
>> Dear all, <br>
>><br>
>> Here's a quick update on the draft statement to the
Human Rights Council regarding the impact of state surveillance
on human rights. The draft statement is below. We are currently
reaching out to Geneva based orgs who might be able to assist
with delivery (thanks Joy) and if not we can still publish it
and do outreach. <br>
>><br>
>> Given the short timeframe, can any further edits be
sent on this thread in the next 3.5 hours? Then I will post it
to the Best Bits site to facilitate endorsement. In the
meantime, if organizations or individuals feel comfortable
endorsing this draft, please reply on this thread and we can add
your name through the Best Bits system later. As a reminder,
this statement would be part of a debate at the HRC that will
take place at 15:00 Geneva time on Monday. Though not ideal,
this was the best time frame we could come up with for
facilitating input and sign on.<br>
>><br>
>> Thanks to everyone who worked on this over the last
12 hours and apologies for any shortcoming in the process
because of time constraints. Looking forward to more input and
to working together to get this finalized.<br>
>><br>
>> Best, <br>
>> Deborah <br>
>><br>
>> Agenda item 8:/General Debate/<br>
>> <br>
>> Civil Society Statement to the Human Rights
Council on the impact of State Surveillance on Human Rights
addressing the PRISM/NSA case<br>
>><br>
>> Thank you Mr. President. I speak on behalf of
______ organizations from ___ countries, across ___ regions.
This is a truly global issue. We express strong concern over
recent revelations of surveillance of internet and telephone
communications of US and non-US nationals by the government of
the United States of America. Equally concerning is the
provision of access to the results of that surveillance to other
governments such as the United Kingdom, and the indication of
the possible complicity of some of the globally dominant
US-based Internet companies whose services and reach are
universally distributed. These revelations raise the appearance
of, and may even suggest a blatant and systematic disregard for
human rights as articulated in Articles 17 and 19 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), as
well as Articles 12 and 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights.<br>
>><br>
>> Just last year the Council unanimously adopted
Resolution 20/8, which "Affirms that the same rights that people
have offline must also be protected online, in particular
freedom of expression ..."[1] But during this session the
Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression reported
(A/HRC/23/40) worrying new trends in state surveillance of
communications with serious implications for the exercise of the
human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and
expression. The Special Rapporteur notes that inadequate and
non-existent legal frameworks "create a fertile ground for
arbitrary and unlawful infringements of the right to privacy in
communications and, consequently, also threaten the protection
of the right to freedom of opinion and expression". [2]<br>
>><br>
>> Affirmation of internet rights and freedoms by
governments in the cross regional statement on freedom of
expression and the Internet is important. But civil society is
extremely concerned that governments supporting this statement
are not addressing, and in fact are ignoring, the recent serious
revelations about mass surveillance in the PRISM/NSA case.
Although the personal information disclosed under this programme
is subject to the oversight of the US Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Court (FISC), that court sits in secret and has no
responsiblity for ensuring the human rights of those not subject
to US jurisdiction.<br>
>><br>
>> The introduction of surveillance mechanisms into
the very heart of the data streams of the globally central
service providers storing and communicating the majority of the
world's digital communications is a backward step for human
rights in the digital age. As La Rue notes: "This raises
serious concern with regard to the extra-territorial commission
of human rights violations and the inability of individuals to
know that they might be subject to foreign surveillance,
challenge decisions with respect to foreign surveillance, or
seek remedies." An immediate response is needed.<br>
>><br>
>> We call on companies that are voluntary and
involuntary parties to the violation of the fundamental rights
of their users globally to immediately suspend this practice.
Such action would uphold the Human Rights Council endorsed
United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights,
the “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework of A/HRC/RES/17/4.<br>
>><br>
>> We call for protection of those who have made these
violations public. As Mr La Rue notes, laws "must not be used to
target whistleblowers ... nor should they hamper the legitimate
oversight of government action by citizens." We urge States
protect those whistleblowers involved in this case and to
support their efforts to combat violations of the fundamental
human rights of all global citizens. Whistleblowers play a
critical role in promoting transparency and upholding the human
rights of all. <br>
>> <br>
>> This recent case is a new kind of human rights
violation specifically relevant to the Internet and one
foreshadowed in the Council's 2012 Expert Panel on Freedom of
Expression and the Internet. We therefore call on the Human
Rights Council to act swiftly to prevent creation of a global
Internet based surveillance system. One action the Council could
take would be to follow up the Expert Panel by convening a
multistakeholder process to support the recommendation of Mr. La
Rue that the Human Rights Committee develop a new General
Comment on the right to privacy in light of technological
advancements <br>
>><br>
>> [1]
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/G12/153/25/PDF/G1215325.pdf?OpenElement">http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/G12/153/25/PDF/G1215325.pdf?OpenElement</a><br>
>><br>
>> [2]
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session23/A.HRC.23.40_EN.pdf">http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session23/A.HRC.23.40_EN.pdf</a><br>
>><br>
>> ENDS<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Gene Kimmelman <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:genekimmelman@gmail.com">genekimmelman@gmail.com</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:genekimmelman@gmail.com"><mailto:genekimmelman@gmail.com></a>>
wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> I'm glad to see everyone diving in on this. I
have only one overarching issue to raise concerning the framing
of whatever groups decide to put out: I believe it would be
most powerful to challenge both the US Gvt. and companies to
explain how what they have done does NOT constitute human
rights violations, with specific details to explain their
stance. I believe all the language people are suggesting can
fit within this framing, and put the burden on others to show
how our concerns are not justified. This has more to do with
long-term diplomatic impact that anything else; the debate will
continue and many of the facts will probably never be made
public -- but I think it is a strategic advantage for civil
society to always be calling for transparency and basing its
conclusions on both what facts are presented, and what concerns
are not addressed by the presentation of convincing
arguments/facts.<br>
>> On Jun 9, 2013, at 8:50 PM, Jeremy Malcolm
wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>> On 10/06/2013, at 12:47 AM, Deborah Brown
<<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:deborah@accessnow.org">deborah@accessnow.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:deborah@accessnow.org"><mailto:deborah@accessnow.org></a>>
wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>>> In any case, we could still work on a
statement to be released around this discussion, or later in the
HRC session, which ends this week. Jeremy, have you had the
chance to work on an outline? If not, I'm happy to help start
the drafting process. My main concern is whether we have enough
time for significant participation from a diversity of groups so
that this is coming from a global coalition. <br>
>>><br>
>>> Would it be OK if we copy it from the pad
to a sign-on statement on bestbits.net <a
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="http://bestbits.net/"><http://bestbits.net/></a> 5
hours before the hearing? Those who are working on the pad can
pre-endorse it there. If 5 hours ahead is not enough, then I'll
need to instruct someone else on how to do it earlier, because
I'll be in the air until then.<br>
>>><br>
>>> -- <br>
>>><br>
>>> *Dr Jeremy Malcolm<br>
>>> Senior Policy Officer<br>
>>> Consumers International | the global
campaigning voice for consumers*<br>
>>> Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East<br>
>>> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji
Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia<br>
>>> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
<tel:%2B60%203%207726%201599><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> WCRD 2013 – Consumer Justice Now! |
Consumer Protection Map: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main">https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main</a>
| #wcrd2013<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> @Consumers_Int | <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.consumersinternational.org">www.consumersinternational.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/"><http://www.consumersinternational.org/></a>
| <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational">www.facebook.com/consumersinternational</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational"><http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational></a><br>
>>><br>
>>> Read our email confidentiality notice <a
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality"><http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality></a>.
Don't print this email unless necessary.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> -- <br>
>>> You received this message because you are
subscribed to the Google Groups "Web We Want working group"
group.<br>
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop
receiving emails from it, send an email to <a
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:webwewant+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">webwewant+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:webwewant+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com"><mailto:webwewant+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com></a>.<br>
>>> For more options, visit <a
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out">https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out</a>.<br>
>>> <br>
>>> <br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> -- <br>
>> Deborah Brown<br>
>> Policy Analyst<br>
>> Access | AccessNow.org<br>
>> E. <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:deborah@accessnow.org">deborah@accessnow.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:deborah@accessnow.org"><mailto:deborah@accessnow.org></a><br>
>> @deblebrown<br>
>> PGP 0x5EB4727D<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> -- <br>
><br>
> -- <br>
><br>
> Joana Varon Ferraz<br>
> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS-FGV)<br>
> @joana_varon</span><br>
<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
<br>
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
<br>
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.enigmail.net/">http://www.enigmail.net/</a>
<br>
<br>
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRtZurAAoJEA9zUGgfM+bq1coIAIVkFyZmO+KH/pRr0a4hXkhH
<br>
/k4wojL3tG6WzRCY8/tP3v8NVY8L2QIG1PJoSUYw4afnrGWw2KZbEukhWpoZGm8k
<br>
l/Bn/BWruU/4uPqGcPr8OME6oa9/CcSK/O0IQ04poiHwn0u81yzZ5BPooxKKmv7W
<br>
bjecU0O8qwuE3YNWzNCvWJdNBAuEPg40A6Z7IjiY6w+zdLXAyaiV4XjkpWzXkNz0
<br>
rk1kgY1LcG0c6QKdxFTAjDGRC+KUeirxRSpKEd+NdQO1dyrKH0XX82oc0J7y6ciR
<br>
G2XLDxJULFIpHl0qBeuXPgy1883vB50RPtghRyQnRxl4rq41T9ED0UYtcOwF5Rs=
<br>
=/bjR
<br>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>