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

Thu Jun 13 10:18:54 EDT 2013

I agree with Parminder' s suggested paragragh with one friendly amendment: instead of stating these actions are human rights violations,  I suggest "almost certainly human rights violations. " Rather than an absolute assertion,  it may be wise to give them a chance to at least offer a defense,  if they can.

-------- Original message --------
From: parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> 
Date:  
To: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net 
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Delivery of International civil society letter to Congress to follow up from HRC statement 

The statement has turned out well. However, I remain concerned about the fact that the issue of non citizens related content surveillance has not at all been addressed by the US authorities. They havent bothered to say a word on it (not that it is easily defensible).  I would like the group to consider adding the following paragraph somewhere......

"We are extremely disappointed that, in all the post 'disclosures' statements, US authorities have only insisted that there was no access obtained to content related to US citizens, and just their communication         meta-data was collected. There has not been  a word on the issue of large-scale access to content related to non US citizens, which is a violation of their human rights. The focussing of the US authorities on the difference between treatment of US citizens and non-citizens on an issue which essentially relates to violation of human rights is very problematic. Human rights are universal, and every government must refrain from violating them for all people, and not merely for its citizens. The current and future US law and practices on this matter should take note of this. "

I  still have issues with the role of the involved companies, which I will address in a separate email. I am fine though to address them separately, through a possible second statement. 

Meanwhile the second sentence in the following somehow looks not quite right. 

"The introduction of untargeted surveillance mechanisms at the heart of global digital communications severely threatens human rights in the digital age. These new forms of decentralized power reflect fundamental shifts in the structure of information systems in modern societies. [3] and aAny step in this direction needs to be scrutinized through ample, deep and transparent debate. Interference with the human rights of citizens by any government, their own or foreign, is unacceptable."
What is being referred to as a 'form of decentralised power'? From the reference I take it, it is about 'arab spring' kind of people's power, but that doesnt look clear from the way the sentence is wedged between the other two sentences...

parminder 

On Thursday 13 June 2013 05:11 PM, Anja Kovacs wrote:
Also, in response to Parminder's questions: while         we had agreed from the beginning that the focus of this         particular statement would be the US Congress, I feel (and I just reread it to check) that it does foreground the concerns of non-US citizens/resident (as it was meant to do in my reading as well). Parminder, do you really feel that doesn't come out at all? In that case, we do have some more work to do....

On 13 June 2013 16:28, Anja Kovacs <anja at internetdemocracy.in> wrote:
Anriette, is there a strong reason why you feel we should release this tomorrow already? My inclination would be to agree with Nnenna and others and to wait until Monday, but would be keen to know why you feel tomorrow is a better idea. 

On 13 June 2013 14:37, Nnenna Nwakanma <nnenna75 at gmail.com> wrote:
Hi people

I will say  submit on Monday.  When you kick off the week with it, you will have ample                           time to rave up media attention on it..
I am hoping Mandela does not give up the                           fight.. because that will overshadow any other                           Internet news...

I am booked for the very first Africa Internet Summit in Lusaka next week.  I do hope to be able to draw attention to the statement, as well as some that have been made by Best Bits.

Best of the day..

Nnenna

On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Greetings everyone

Content is coming along well.

Jeremy, in response to your question,                                 what about giving people until
21h00 GMT/UTC today, Thursday. Then you can close the text, finalise it,
and release for sign-ons and give people until 16h00 GMT/UTC Friday for
sign ons and then we can send it off before the end of the business day
in Washington DC (will be 12h00 in DC).

That will accommodate Parminder's request, but still enable us to get
enough sign ons and get the letter to Washington DC on Friday. Only
region that will have a shortish period for sign ons will be the Americas.

Will this work?

Anriette

On 13/06/2013 08:13, Jeremy Malcolm                                 wrote:

- --
- ------------------------------------------------------
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
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRuYgcAAoJEJ0z+TtuxKew024H/RGq5qboWUylw9fs7Mg0mgZy
B8nQxTMzLoTlwpV34ODm4aGy43elL3HDiTV1sqd6npOygUi9D0LWOIVC9R+JXtfR
pckH4i7p23UQCbyTxdfn6pcqV6vnxAkev/2UjbR0sFrb3yBt8YQr/vrYKjnWYPgn
u0rGffZ+UVKEBzuNQn57VBpYKe1KQeETCrv52eVfSR3gB3vzpYtvzfUnBHY7KzZ6
GrEf5dzk36zcIHyPHqfCl2DpcCzI5HgyzQuFKxGEzA+YKQj6ISFJFhQ1Z5JAdmxN
LQryTnfqihzYmhuKpApJr/PAvSd4PMcwMoSSLIMbNb77H7ewP6IopVKiFFM4iAA=
=ssiT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Dr. Anja Kovacs
The Internet Democracy Project

+91 9899028053 | @anjakovacs
www.internetdemocracy.in

-- 
Dr. Anja Kovacs
The Internet Democracy Project

+91 9899028053 | @anjakovacs
www.internetdemocracy.in

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20130613/58aaef6a/attachment.htm>