<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    For me going forward, the issue is the ability of the US to go
    forward at simultaneously as a democracy and human rights defender
    and promoter, as well as a 'violator' of it. <br>
    <br>
    The US state is one of the most remarkable ones in the ability to
    handle contradictions of this nature... there are numerous examples
    of this... <br>
    <br>
    This dualistic politics is what will be interesting. It is what
    makes sensible for me the protection of American's 'rights' over
    those of foreigners - as the discourse is unfolding. <br>
    <br>
    From my Third World perspective, this would be the frame of
    analysis. Allowing us to see the consequences of the dichotomies,
    and contradictions in this process...<br>
    <br>
    Riaz<br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2013/06/15 12:35 PM, parminder
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote cite="mid:51BC3560.2090505@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 02:49 PM,
        Baudouin SCHOMBE wrote:<br>
      </div>
      <blockquote
cite="mid:CAHj_20iKjmRGFk8siuC6EAehTuRNS=s48njLnKOS4KtBrTy4Zw@mail.gmail.com"
        type="cite">
        <div dir="ltr">I support this statement. After all, no one can
          pretend to be above the law.</div>
      </blockquote>
      <br>
      When there is no global law then it is more difficult to say no
      one can be above the law.... and there is no global law to
      constrain the US from doing what it would with the centres and
      nodes of the Internet which it occupies.... We can though keep
      talking about the much fancied but meaningless bottom up processes
      here.... parminder <br>
      <br>
      parminder <br>
      <blockquote
cite="mid:CAHj_20iKjmRGFk8siuC6EAehTuRNS=s48njLnKOS4KtBrTy4Zw@mail.gmail.com"
        type="cite">
        <div dir="ltr"> It is a principle as old as democracy in
          advanced democracies, prinicipe must constantly remain in our
          minds and reflexes whatever our geographical situation and who
          we are.I support this statement. After all, no one can pretend
          to be above the law. It is a principle as old as democracy in
          advanced democracies, prinicipe must constantly remain in our
          minds and reflexes whatever our geographical  localisation and
          who we are.<br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all">
          <div>SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN<br>
            <br>
            Téléphone mobile:+243998983491<br>
            email                  : <a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="mailto:b.schombe@gmail.com" target="_blank">b.schombe@gmail.com</a><br>
            skype                 : b.schombe<br>
            blog                    : <a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="http://akimambo.unblog.fr" target="_blank">http://akimambo.unblog.fr</a><br>
            Site Web             : <a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="http://www.ticafrica.net" target="_blank">www.ticafrica.net</a><br>
             <br>
            <br>
          </div>
          <br>
          <br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">2013/6/15 Norbert Bollow <span
              dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                href="mailto:nb@bollow.ch" target="_blank">nb@bollow.ch</a>></span><br>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
              .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> >
              > <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"
href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d0873f38-d1c5-11e2-9336-00144feab7de.html"
                target="_blank">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"
                href="http://www.standaard.be/cnt/DMF20130610_063"
                target="_blank">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"
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"
                target="_blank">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>
____________________________________________________________<br>
              You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
                   <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                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>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
          <br>
        </div>
      </blockquote>
      <br>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>