<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">+1<br>
Even ask ONU to create a special court for digital crimes.<br>
<br>
@+, Dom<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Dominique Lacroix
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://reseaux.blog.lemonde.fr">http://reseaux.blog.lemonde.fr</a>
<br>
Société européenne de l'Internet
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.ies-france.eu">http://www.ies-france.eu</a>
<br>
+33 (0)6 63 24 39 14</div>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Le 15/06/13 08:58, parminder a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:51BC10AA.9020909@itforchange.net" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Saturday 15 June 2013 11:27 AM,
Imran Ahmed Shah wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1371275829.38102.YahooMailNeo@web125104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff;
font-family:tahoma, new york, times, serif;font-size:10pt">
<div><span>Dear Norbert, </span></div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 13px; font-family:
tahoma, 'new york', times, serif; background-color:
transparent; font-style: normal;"><span>Should we also
address the same concern with </span><span style="color:
rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family: verdana, helvetica,
sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">UN General Assembly?</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Interesting question.... That was my initial feeling about writing
to US Congress.... I dont feel that it feels accountable to non US
citizens, and all the pronoucements from the US post PRISM
disclosures confirm that.... We should appeal to those who are
show some feeling of accountability to us... At the global stage,
that is the UN, and UN GA.... I think we must write to them.<br>
<br>
That is also my problem with the ISOC statement in the issue, they
speak about global principles on privacy etc developed at
plurilateral forums - most of the rich nations - which exclude
most of us... They speak of the need of a global dialogue that
should take place on he issue (and I agree) but dont say where it
should take place. I reckon, if I direct this question to them
they'd say, the IGF. Which is very well. But the next question is,
subsequent to such a dialogue, and as an outcome of it, where
should development of global principles for privacy etc should
take place - to which I would almost certainly not obtain any
reply... Although I am willing to be proved wrong - by ISOC or any
of its sympathisers here. <br>
<br>
I dont agree with statements that may merely do what seem to have
become difficult to ignore, without clear political direct for the
corresponding required political actions... This is the doctrine
of political responsibility that we, at my organisation, take
really seriously, and we think all civil society should. We have
here not to make just statements, we are here to change the world
in a manner that it becomes more fair to those who are
marginalised at present. <br>
<br>
I think we should all begin to act less like second class US
citizens, begging for at least some recognition, and behave like
global citizens of a globally democratic polity. The biggest
lession from the recent NSA disclosures is this: unaccountable
power will also certianly go corrupt..... Make sure anyone who
exercises global power - as the US does to a extremely momentous
extent - must be made 'globally' accountable. And any such
accountability can only be exercised through a mechanism where
everyone from across the globe is equally represented...<br>
<br>
Lets write to the UN assembly too...<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1371275829.38102.YahooMailNeo@web125104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff;
font-family:tahoma, new york, times, serif;font-size:10pt">
<div style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-size: 11px;
font-family: verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;
background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;"><span
style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family: verdana,
helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">B/R</span></div>
<div style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-size: 11px;
font-family: verdana, helvetica, sans-serif;
background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;"><span
style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family: verdana,
helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 11px;">Imran</span></div>
<div><br>
<blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255);
margin-left: 5px; margin-top: 5px; padding-left: 5px;">
<div style="font-family: tahoma, 'new york', times, serif;
font-size: 10pt;">
<div style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york',
times, serif; font-size: 12pt;">
<div dir="ltr">
<hr size="1"> <font face="Arial" size="2"> <b><span
style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b>
Norbert Bollow <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:nb@bollow.ch"><nb@bollow.ch></a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b>
Saturday, 15 June 2013, 5:09<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b>
[governance] FORMAL CONSENSUS CALL - IGC
endorsement: International civil society letter to
Congress<br>
</font> </div>
<div class="y_msg_container"><br>
> > <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://bestbits.net/prism-congress/"
target="_blank">http://bestbits.net/prism-congress/</a><br>
<br>
[with IGC coordinator hat on]<br>
<br>
FORMAL CONSENSUS CALL<br>
<br>
We have had quite a few expressions of support for
the “International<br>
civil society letter to Congress” already, and no
objections so far.<br>
<br>
Please review the proposed statement text as
included for reference<br>
below.<br>
<br>
If you agree with the proposed statement or are
indifferent about it,<br>
there is no need to take action about it at the
current stage.<br>
<br>
If however you disagree with IGC expressing support
for this letter, it<br>
is now the final opportunity to object if you wish
to do so.<br>
<br>
** Any objections should be posted by Monday June
17, 9am UTC. **<br>
<br>
If no objections are received by that time, IGC
endorsement of the<br>
proposed letter will be deemed to have been decided
by consensus.<br>
<br>
NOTE on potential further steps in the
decision-making process: If there<br>
are any objections, we will then discuss how to
proceed.<br>
<br>
Greetings,<br>
Norbert<br>
<br>
-- text proposed for endorsement
follows--------------------------------<br>
<br>
Civil society letter to United States Congress on
Internet and<br>
telecommunications surveillance<br>
<br>
Members of US Congress:<br>
<br>
We write as a coalition of civil society
organizations from around the<br>
world to express our serious alarm regarding
revelations of Internet<br>
and telephone communications surveillance of US and
non-US citizens by<br>
the US government. We also wish to express our grave
concern that US<br>
authorities may have made the data resulting from
those surveillance<br>
activities available to other States, including the
United Kingdom, the<br>
Netherlands, Canada, Belgium, Australia and New
Zealand.[1] Many<br>
US-based Internet companies with global reach also
seem to be<br>
participating in these practices.[2]<br>
<br>
The introduction of surveillance mechanisms at the
heart of global<br>
digital communications severely threatens human
rights in the digital<br>
age. These new forms of decentralized power reflect
fundamental shifts<br>
in the structure of information systems in modern
societies.[3] Any step<br>
in this direction needs to be scrutinized through
ample, deep and<br>
transparent debate. Interference with the human
rights of citizens by<br>
any government, their own or foreign, is
unacceptable. The situation of<br>
a citizen unable to communicate private thoughts
without surveillance<br>
by a foreign state not only violates the rights to
privacy and human<br>
dignity, but also threatens the fundamental rights
to freedom of<br>
thought, opinion and expression, and association
that are at the center<br>
of any democratic practice. Such actions are
unacceptable and raise<br>
serious concerns about extra-territorial breaches of
human rights. The<br>
inability of citizens to know if they are subject to
foreign<br>
surveillance, to challenge such surveillance, or to
seek remedies is<br>
even more alarming.[4]<br>
<br>
The contradiction between the persistent affirmation
of human rights<br>
online by the US government and the recent
allegations of what appears<br>
to be mass surveillance of US and non-US citizens by
that same<br>
government is very disturbing and carries negative
repercussions on the<br>
global stage. A blatant and systematic disregard for
the human rights<br>
articulated in Articles 17 and 19 of the
International Covenant on<br>
Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which the
United States is<br>
signatory, as well as Articles 12 and 19 of the
Universal Declaration<br>
of Human Rights is suggested. Bearing in mind that
the US must engage<br>
in a long overdue discussion about how to update and
modernize its<br>
policy to align with its own founding documents and
principles, what<br>
happens next in legislative and Executive Branch
oversight in the US<br>
will have huge and irreversible consequences for the
promotion and<br>
protection of the human rights of people around the
world.<br>
<br>
It is also notable that the United States government
supported the<br>
United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution 20/8,
which “[a]ffirms<br>
that the same rights that people have offline must
also be protected<br>
online, in particular freedom of expression …”[5]
and, just a few days<br>
ago, on June 10, the US was part of a core group of
countries that<br>
drafted a cross regional statement, which correctly
emphasized “that<br>
when addressing any security concerns on the
Internet, this must be<br>
done in a manner consistent with states’ obligations
under<br>
international human rights law and full respect for
human rights must<br>
be maintained.”[6] That was apparently not the case
with the latest<br>
practices of the US Government. Besides representing
a major violation<br>
of fundamental human rights of people worldwide, the
incoherence<br>
between practices and public statements by the US
also undermines the<br>
moral credibility of the country within the global
community that<br>
fights for human rights, as they apply to the
Internet and fatally<br>
impacts consumers’ trust in all American companies
that provide<br>
worldwide services.<br>
<br>
On 10 June, 2013 many signatories to this letter
joined together to<br>
raise our concerns to the United Nations Human
Rights Council.[7] We did<br>
so against the background of the recent report of
the UN Special<br>
Rapporteur on the right to Freedom of Opinion and
Expression, Mr. Frank<br>
La Rue.[8] This report detailed worrying trends in
state surveillance of<br>
communications with serious implications for the
exercise of the human<br>
rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and
expression. We note<br>
that US-based stakeholders have also written a
letter to Congress to<br>
express their concerns about the compliance of the
current national<br>
surveillance program with domestic law.[9]<br>
<br>
We are also extremely disappointed that, in all the
post ‘disclosures’<br>
statements, US authorities have only insisted that
there was no access<br>
obtained to content related to US citizens, and just
their<br>
communication meta-data was collected. There has not
been a word on the<br>
issue of large-scale access to content related to
non US citizens,<br>
which constitute an almost certain human rights
violation. The focusing<br>
of the US authorities on the difference between
treatment of US<br>
citizens and non-citizens on an issue which
essentially relates to<br>
violation of human rights is very problematic. Human
rights are<br>
universal, and every government must refrain from
violating them for<br>
all people, and not merely for its citizens. We
strongly advocate that<br>
current and future legal provisions and practices
take this fact into<br>
due consideration.<br>
<br>
We therefore urge the Obama administration and the
United States<br>
Congress to take immediate action to dismantle
existing, and prevent<br>
the creation of future, global Internet and
telecommunications based<br>
surveillance systems. We additionally urge the US
Administration, the<br>
FBI and the Attorney General to allow involved or
affected companies to<br>
publish statistics of past and future Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance<br>
Act (FISA) requests they have received or may
receive.[10] We further<br>
call on the US Congress to establish protections for
government<br>
whistleblowers in order to better ensure that the
public is adequately<br>
informed about abuses of power that violate the
fundamental human<br>
rights of the citizens of all countries, US and
other.[11] We also join<br>
Humans Rights Watch in urging the creation of an
independent panel with<br>
subpoena power and all necessary security clearances
to examine current<br>
practices and to make recommendations to ensure
appropriate protections<br>
for the rights to privacy, free expression, and
association. The<br>
results of this panel should be broadly published.<br>
<br>
[1] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d0873f38-d1c5-11e2-9336-00144feab7de.html">http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d0873f38-d1c5-11e2-9336-00144feab7de.html</a>,<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.bof.nl/2013/06/11/bits-of-freedom-dutch-spooks-must-stop-use-of-prism/"
target="_blank">https://www.bof.nl/2013/06/11/bits-of-freedom-dutch-spooks-must-stop-use-of-prism/</a><br>
and <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.standaard.be/cnt/DMF20130610_063">http://www.standaard.be/cnt/DMF20130610_063</a>.<br>
<br>
[2] Including Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook,
PalTalk, AOL, Skype,<br>
YouTube, and Apple:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html"
target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html</a><br>
<br>
[3] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.state.gov/statecraft/overview/"
target="_blank">http://www.state.gov/statecraft/overview/</a><br>
<br>
[4] (A/HRC/23/40)<br>
<br>
[5] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?si=A/HRC/RES/20/8"
target="_blank">http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?si=A/HRC/RES/20/8</a><br>
<br>
[6] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://geneva.usmission.gov/2013/06/10/internet-freedom-5/"
target="_blank">http://geneva.usmission.gov/2013/06/10/internet-freedom-5/</a><br>
<br>
[7] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://bestbits.net/prism-nsa"
target="_blank">http://bestbits.net/prism-nsa</a><br>
<br>
[8] (A/HRC/23/40)<br>
<br>
[9] Asking the U.S. government to allow Google to
publish more national<br>
security request data<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/asking-us-government-to-allow-google-to.html"
target="_blank">http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/asking-us-government-to-allow-google-to.html</a><br>
<br>
[10] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.stopwatching.us/"
target="_blank">https://www.stopwatching.us/</a><br>
<br>
[11] The just-released Global Principles on National
Security and<br>
Freedom of Information (the Tshwane Principles)
which address the topic<br>
of Whistleblowing and National Security provide
relevant guidance in<br>
this regard:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/Global%20Principles%20on%20National%20Security%20and%20the%20Right%20to%20Information%20%28Tshwane%20Principles%29%20-%20June%202013.pdf">http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/Global%20Principles%20on%20National%20Security%20and%20the%20Right%20to%20Information%20%28Tshwane%20Principles%29%20-%20June%202013.pdf</a>.<br>
<br>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the
list:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
ymailto="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing"
target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
<br>
For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance"
target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter,
see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t"
target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>