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

[Cynthia Wong]

Hi all:

Thanks, all, for a very fruitful discussion.  It is hard to find the end of the various email threads, so I will weigh in here.  

A couple of suggestions: 

1) For the asks in the final paragraph, it may be useful to identify the specific actors that would be best placed to take those actions forward.    

So for example: We therefore urge that **the Obama administration and the US Congress act immediately to** dismantle and prevent the creation now and in the future of a global Internet and telecomunications based surveillance system. **The Administration / FBI and Attorney General should allow** involved or affected companies to publish statistics of past and future Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) requests they have received or may receive.

2) In addition, there is some fear that Congress has not shown enough courage (being polite with my language here) to exercise real oversight over these programs to prevent abuse of power.  As a result, many groups (including HRW, independent of the various joint letters) are calling for an independent panel/committee to investigate whether the agencies have breached the Constitution and/or human rights.  That might be an additional ask to consider.  

Here are examples of the formulation of those asks:
* HRW: Given concern about the vigor of congressional oversight, Human Rights Watch urged the creation of an independent panel with subpoena power and all necessary security clearances to examine current practices and to make recommendations to ensure appropriate protections for rights to privacy, free expression, and association.
* Stop Watching Us letter: Create a special committee to investigate, report, and reveal to the public the extent of this domestic spying. This committee should create specific recommendations for legal and regulatory reform to end unconstitutional surveillance

The Stop Watching Us letter also asks for accountability for those public officials responsible for the programs, which may also be worth considering: "Hold accountable those public officials who are found to be responsible for this unconstitutional surveillance."  

Thanks,
Cynthia





-----Original Message-----
From: Anriette Esterhuysen [mailto:anriette at apc.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 3:45 PM
To: Anja Kovacs
Cc: Gene Kimmelman; Kevin Bankston; Cynthia Wong; Ginger Paque; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net&gt
Subject: Re: [bestbits] International civil society letter to Congress to follow up from HRC statement

Dear all

I think Anja puts it very well. Our letter will be part of a series of complimentary actions and we should feel comfortable with asking others from the Global South to sign on to it.

Kevin I am happy with your language as well.

What we do want to avoid in my view is to use language that will encourage readers to dismiss the message we try to get across as being crudely anti-US.

Who is doing the next clean draft?

I am happy to work on edits in the morning if needed.

Anriette

On 12/06/2013 21:25, Anja Kovacs wrote:
> Dear Gene and all,
>
> As this statement is supposed to be one of international civil 
> society, I think it is important to retain that flavour - I don't 
> think there is a point in simply replicating what US civil society has had to say.
>
> This is my belief also because I don't see this intervention in 
> isolation, but as part of a broader engagement with US institutions, 
> including with the State Department, in which we attempt precisely to 
> convey alternative perspectives on core Internet issues, rather than 
> simply feeding into an agenda already set for us.
>
> I can see that in this particular statement, we would want to think 
> carefully about which concerns to highlight and how to frame them, so 
> as to provide as much support as possible to the current momentum. But 
> I do think there are certain non-negotiables if a wide sign up to this 
> statement is desired. For example, at last year's Best Bits meeting, 
> we already had a discussion on how few of us in the Global South use 
> the term "Internet freedom" to describe the work we do for a whole 
> range of highly political reasons and so I would think not using that 
> term is one such non-negotiable. As long as we take such issues into 
> account, I am sure a sound compromise can be reached that will make 
> for a strong statement acceptable to all.
>
> And I for one am happy with the framing suggested by Kevin on the 
> whistle-blowers issue, by the way.
>
> Thanks and best regards,
> Anja
>
>
>

--
------------------------------------------------------
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