[bestbits] International civil society letter to Congress to follow up from HRC statement

Wed Jun 12 12:02:26 EDT 2013

As I've mentioned in the document:

I believe it is very important to express our concerns about the future of
the whistleblowers in every single statement we make... I mean, the guy is
in huge trouble.. all the efforts are welcome and protecting him is also
part of our main points. That was expressed in a paragraph on our Statement
to HRC and there were a few organizations that signed our statement to HCR
particularly because we have mentioned this point.

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Carolina Rossini <
carolina.rossini at gmail.com> wrote:

> + 1 on Kevin's comments
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Kevin Bankston <kbankston at cdt.org>wrote:
>
>> Sorry, used the old best bits list address, now using new one...
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>> On Jun 12, 2013, at 11:53 AM, Kevin Bankston <kbankston at cdt.org> wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure how bestbits fell out of this thread--I thought bestbists
>> was going to be the main channel for this discussion--so adding that list
>> back into cc.
>>
>> In addition to Carolina, I've also made some small tweaks and one big
>> comment.
>>
>> The tweaks:
>>
>> 1) Changed "Some US-based Internet companies with global reach also seem
>> to be *complicit* in these practices" to "participating".  I am all for
>> calling out "complicity" in cases like, e.g., AT&T's cooperation with the
>> Bush-era program that operated without court approval (for the record, I'm
>> one of the attorneys who brought cases against AT&T and the NSA over that
>> program, while I was at EFF).  But as far as we know now the companies
>> participating currently are doing so under secret *order* of the FISA court
>> and even if they had attempted to challenge those orders we would never
>> know.  So I'm less willing to tar with the "complicity" brush.
>>
>> 2) Changed "Involved or affected companies *must* publish statistics" to
>> "must *be allowed to*" publish statistics.  Right now they are forbidden by
>> law from doing so.  So we should be asking USG to allow them to do so.
>>
>> The one big comment, seconding Carolina's: I think that the paragraph
>> focusing on whistleblowing is a politically dangerous distraction from the
>> main point.  We had the same discussion in the stopwathing.uscoalition--many people wanted to focus on Snowden--but after a lot of
>> debate it was agreed that doing so would actually detract from what he is
>> trying to accomplish.  I think the same is true here.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> K
>>
>> PS CDT will have a blog post up shortly praising the HRC statement and
>> the Larue report and highlighting for a US audience the global human rights
>> impact of this issue.
>>     ____________________________________
>> Kevin S. Bankston
>> Senior Counsel and Free Expression Director
>> Center for Democracy & Technology
>> 1634 I St NW, Suite 1100
>> Washington, DC 20006
>> 202.407.8834 direct
>> 202.637.0968 fax
>> kbankston at cdt.org
>>
>> Follow CDT on Twitter at @cendemtech
>>
>> On Jun 12, 2013, at 11:34 AM, Carolina Rossini <
>> carolina.rossini at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all
>>
>> I just talked to Gene, and we have some new inputs. Edits on the letter.
>>
>> C
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Joana Varon <joana at varonferraz.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>> Great job! I'm adding some brackets.. if I might.
>>> Shall we be delivering this in Tunis, next week? During the Freedom
>>> Online Coalition meeting.
>>> best
>>> joana
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Carolina Rossini <
>>> carolina.rossini at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Kevin,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your inputs. However, do you think there is space to say
>>>> - besides reforming such law - there was a overreaching of authority ?
>>>>
>>>> C
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Kevin Bankston <kbankston at cdt.org>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> By then we might also have responses to Andrew Puddephatt's questions.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure how best to answer Andrew's questions; FISA is a complex
>>>>> law.  And to be clear, Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act was an amendment to
>>>>> FISA's provision for court orders for records; not a separate law.  And the
>>>>> state secrets privilege is common law; there is no statute for it.  But
>>>>> I'll do my best!
>>>>>
>>>>> To read Andrew's question as narrowly as possible so that I can give a
>>>>> quick answer:  In the context of foreign intelligence and terrorism
>>>>> investigations, FISA regulates surveillance conducted inside the United
>>>>> States, and acquisition of records from companies inside the United
>>>>> States, and surveillance outside of the United States to the extent it
>>>>> implicates United States person (i.e., citizens and naturalized permanent
>>>>> residents); there is also the National Security Letter authority which is
>>>>> an authority for the FBI to obtain records without going through the FISA
>>>>> Court.
>>>>>
>>>>> These authorities directly implicate the privacy of non-Americans to
>>>>> the extent that 1) non-Americans may reside in the US, 2) non-Americans
>>>>> communications will transit or be stored in facilities in the US, 3)
>>>>> records about non-Americans will be stored by companies in the US.
>>>>>  Finally, it also implicates the privacy of non-Americans to the extent
>>>>> that it does not at all regulate USG surveillance of non-Americans outside
>>>>> of America.
>>>>>
>>>>> FISA is at 18 USC 1801 et seq, in Chapter 36 of our US Code:
>>>>> http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/chapter-36
>>>>>
>>>>> In most relevant part, Subchapter I deals with individual wiretaps
>>>>> ("electronic surveillance"), II with secret physical searches, III with pen
>>>>> registers and trap and trace devices (i.e. surveillance of metadata), IV
>>>>> with records demands (now referred to as PATRIOT 215 orders since it was
>>>>> significantly amended by that section of PATRIOT).  Meanwhile, Subchapter
>>>>> VI--added by the FISA Amendments Act (FAA) in 2008--provided the new and
>>>>> seriously problematic authority to obtain year long orders authorizing
>>>>> "programs" of non-individualized surveillance of communications where at
>>>>> least one party to the communication is outside of the country, while also
>>>>> allowing without any court authorization the interception of any
>>>>> foreign-to-foreign communications transiting the US; that is the authority
>>>>> under which PRISM is being used, as far as we best understand it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Therefore and to be absolutely clear: amendment to these laws--and
>>>>> especially a narrowing of the FAA--would SUBSTANTIALLY impact the privacy
>>>>> of every non-American who uses modern communications networks and services,
>>>>> especially those with facilities in the US.  And the assistance of
>>>>> international civil society will be critical in any effort to accomplish
>>>>> such amendments.  So--thank you all for what you've been doing!
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Kevin
>>>>>    ____________________________________
>>>>> Kevin S. Bankston
>>>>> Senior Counsel and Free Expression Director
>>>>> Center for Democracy & Technology
>>>>> 1634 I St NW, Suite 1100
>>>>> Washington, DC 20006
>>>>> 202.407.8834 direct
>>>>> 202.637.0968 fax
>>>>> kbankston at cdt.org
>>>>>
>>>>> Follow CDT on Twitter at @cendemtech
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 12, 2013, at 10:02 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  We need a clean copy.. but I am afraid I can't work on it today.
>>>>>
>>>>> But thanks MIke and others who have given input.  I would be happy to
>>>>> let Joy and Jeremy clean up and give us a version to send tomorrow or
>>>>> Friday.
>>>>>
>>>>> By then we might also have responses to Andrew Puddephatt's questions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anriette
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/06/2013 15:03, michael gurstein wrote:
>>>>> > I`ve commented as well and also around all day...
>>>>> >
>>>>> > M
>>>>> >
>>>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>>>> > From: webwewant at googlegroups.com [mailto:webwewant at googlegroups.com<webwewant at googlegroups.com>]
>>>>> On
>>>>> > Behalf Of Anriette Esterhuysen
>>>>> > Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 4:28 AM
>>>>> > Cc: webwewant at googlegroups.com;
>>>>> irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>>>>> > Subject: Re: [bestbits] International civil society letter to
>>>>> Congress to
>>>>> > follow up from HRC statement
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> Great work. Thanks Joy and Jeremy . I have made some comments. Will be
>>>>> around all day if needed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anriette
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/06/2013 06:01, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>>>>> > This follows on from a telephone call organised by the Web Foundation
>>>>> > yesterday, in which APC was asked to coordinate a civil society
>>>>> letter
>>>>> > to the US government from international organisations.  That letter
>>>>> > would follow on from our joint statement to the Human Rights Council,
>>>>> > and we would invite Human Rights Watch and Privacy International to
>>>>> > participate in drafting.  APC agreed to do this and suggested
>>>>> > continuing to use Best Bits as the coordinating coalition.
>>>>>
>>>>> > Here is the first rough draft of the text that Joy from APC and I
>>>>> have
>>>>> > begun to put together, which awaits your comments and improvements:
>>>>>
>>>>> > http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/your_name_here (sorry for the dumb URL)
>>>>>
>>>>> > Although I'm cc'ing the IRP and Web We Want lists, to avoid
>>>>> > fragmentation of discussions on the text like happened inadvertently
>>>>> > last time, can I suggest, if nobody objects, that we centralise on
>>>>> > this list, and that if you are not a member you can join at
>>>>> > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits.  To bring in others,
>>>>> you
>>>>> > can point them towards this list too.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  >
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>> Groups
>>>>> > "Web We Want working group" group.
>>>>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>> send an
>>>>> > email to webwewant+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>>>>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
>>>>> executive director, association for progressive communications
>>>>> www.apc.org
>>>>> po box 29755, melville 2109
>>>>> south africa
>>>>> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>> Groups "Web We Want working group" group.
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>>> an email to webwewant+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>> Groups "Web We Want working group" group.
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>>> an email to webwewant+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *Carolina Rossini*
>>>> http://carolinarossini.net/
>>>> + 1 6176979389
>>>> *carolina.rossini at gmail.com*
>>>> skype: carolrossini
>>>> @carolinarossini
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Web We Want working group" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>> an email to webwewant+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Joana Varon Ferraz
>>> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS-FGV)<http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts/>
>>> @joana_varon
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Carolina Rossini*
>> http://carolinarossini.net/
>> + 1 6176979389
>> *carolina.rossini at gmail.com*
>> skype: carolrossini
>> @carolinarossini
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Carolina Rossini*
> http://carolinarossini.net/
> + 1 6176979389
> *carolina.rossini at gmail.com*
> skype: carolrossini
> @carolinarossini
>
>

-- 

-- 

Joana Varon Ferraz
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS-FGV) <http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts/>
@joana_varon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20130612/a0b4550c/attachment.htm>