[bestbits] FW: [IP] DNI releases Fact Sheet on PRISM, but the damage is already done

[Kevin Bankston]

I think that a statement focused on the human rights of non-Americans, spinning off of the Larue report, would be an *incredibly* helpful addition to the dialogue right now--especially if Frank were directly involved.

Also and not for nothing--I want to apologize both for my government's actions, and for a local US civil society coalition--self included--that could have done a better job considering the rights and perspectives of non-US stakeholders when framing our response to this news.  Sincerely.  We will do better.  We've just been scrambling in the face of an avalanche of awful revelations.

Sent via mobile

On Jun 8, 2013, at 7:59 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> On 09/06/2013, at 4:29 AM, "michael gurstein" <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> What comes through loud and clear on this and the associated comments,
>> denials and disclaimers from all and sundry is that this is a global issue
>> requiring a global response and particularly initiatives from a global civil
>> society.  
> 
> Do you think that this is something that we should attempt through Best Bits?  As you quite rightly pointed in response to the joint letter posted to the webwewant list (and as I had also said in an earlier reply), the joint letter from EFF, Free Press and ACLU is not something that international organisations could support, yet international Internet users are are even more affected by the PRISM scandal than US Internet users are.
> 
> In favour of such a response, one of the purposes of Best Bits was to enable a broader perspective to attend the publication of statements on human rights and the Internet, rather than a small cadre of Internet freedom groups drafting and then pushing them out to the rest of the world.  Against, is the concern is that "yet another statement" isn't going to have much cumulative effect at this point, because everybody and their dog has something to say about PRISM right now.
> 
> If we do want to contribute something, then maybe our special competence is in our knowledge of relevant international processes.  So we could perhaps write our statement as a letter to the United Nations Human Rights Council (particularly in the light of Frank La Rue's latest report, http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session23/A.HRC.23.40_EN.pdf).  Or are there other international processes that people think would be an appropriate target for such an intervention?
> 
> Agreed that this is very important, but I just want to make sure we don't issue a statement into the ether that will have zero impact.
> 
> -- 
> Dr Jeremy Malcolm
> Senior Policy Officer
> Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers
> Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
> 
> WCRD 2013 – Consumer Justice Now! | Consumer Protection Map: https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main | #wcrd2013
> 
> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational
> 
> Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20130608/e286ff75/attachment.htm>