[IRPCoalition] [bestbits] [IP] DNI releases Fact Sheet on PRISM, but the damage is already done
Joana Varon
joana at varonferraz.com
Mon Jun 10 05:46:21 EDT 2013
+ 1. Thanks, Joy!
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Rikke Frank Joergensen <rfj at humanrights.dk
> wrote:
> Super proposal by Joy/ APC, I support it !****
>
> ** **
>
> Rikke****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* irp-bounces at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org [mailto:
> irp-bounces at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org] *On Behalf Of *Marianne
> Franklin
> *Sent:* 10. juni 2013 11:41
> *To:* bestbits at lists.bestbits.net;
> irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> *Subject:* Re: [IRPCoalition] [bestbits] [IP] DNI releases Fact Sheet on
> PRISM, but the damage is already done****
>
> ** **
>
> Dear all
>
> +1 from me.
>
> MF****
>
> On 10/06/2013 10:37, parminder wrote:****
>
> I support this text by Joy...****
>
> On Monday 10 June 2013 02:56 PM, joy wrote:****
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi - sharing some ideas that came also from discussion with Frank La Rue's
> office and my suggested edits relate to the last para, the recommended
> action to the Council: - I think we have a 3 pronged approach to the call
> to action which is looking really good:
>
> "We call on the Human Rights Council to act swiftly to prevent creation of
> a global Internet based surveillance system by:
> 1) convening a special session to examine this case 2) supporting the
> recommendation of Mr La Rue that the Human Rights Committee develop of a
> new General Comment 16 on the right to privacy in light of technological
> advancements and 3) requesting the High Commissioner to prepare a report a)
> formally asking states to report on practices and laws in place on
> survellilance and what corrective steps will they willl take to meet human
> rights standards and b) examing the implications of this case in in the
> light of the Human Rights Council endorsed United Nations Guiding
> Principles on Business and Human Rights, the “Protect, Respect and Remedy”
> Framework of A/HRC/RES/17/4.
>
> Joy
>
>
>
> On 10/06/2013 8:47 p.m.,
> Joana Varon wrote:
> > Sure, Parminder. Lets****
>
> remove company names.
>
> ****
>
> > And thanks for the comprehension.
>
> ****
>
> >
>
> ****
>
> >
>
> ****
>
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:38 AM, parminder <
> parminder at itforchange.net****
>
> <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net> <parminder at itforchange.net>>*
> ***
>
> ** **
>
> wrote:
>
> ****
>
> >
>
> ****
>
> > Hi All
>
> ****
>
> >
>
> ****
>
> > IT for Change will endorse this .... (There are some****
>
> changes I would have liked to propose but due to the urgency****
>
> of the issue i would not do it now. Certainly the names of the**
> **
>
> companies involved should have not been mentioned in the****
>
> statement. Can we still do it?.)
>
> ****
>
> >
>
> ****
>
> > I am sure some of you may already be in contact with****
>
> him but if not Philippe Dam with Human Rights Watch may be a****
>
> useful person to talk to on this. i am cc-ing the email to****
>
> him. He is attending the HR Council meeting. Wonder if Joy is***
> *
>
> still there?
>
> ****
>
> >
>
> ****
>
> > Best, parminder
>
> ****
>
> >
>
> ****
>
> >
>
> ****
>
> > On Monday 10 June 2013 10:07 AM, Deborah Brown wrote:
>
> ****
>
> >> Dear all,
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> Here's a quick update on the draft statement to****
>
> the Human Rights Council regarding the impact of state****
>
> surveillance on human rights. The draft statement is below. We**
> **
>
> are currently reaching out to Geneva based orgs who might be****
>
> able to assist with delivery (thanks Joy) and if not we can****
>
> still publish it and do outreach.
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> Given the short timeframe, can any further edits****
>
> be sent on this thread in the next 3.5 hours? Then I will post**
> **
>
> it to the Best Bits site to facilitate endorsement. In the****
>
> meantime, if organizations or individuals feel comfortable****
>
> endorsing this draft, please reply on this thread and we can****
>
> add your name through the Best Bits system later. As a****
>
> reminder, this statement would be part of a debate at the HRC***
> *
>
> that will take place at 15:00 Geneva time on Monday. Though****
>
> not ideal, this was the best time frame we could come up with***
> *
>
> for facilitating input and sign on.
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> Thanks to everyone who worked on this over the****
>
> last 12 hours and apologies for any shortcoming in the process**
> **
>
> because of time constraints. Looking forward to more input and**
> **
>
> to working together to get this finalized.
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> Best,
>
> ****
>
> >> Deborah
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> Agenda item 8:/General Debate/
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> Civil Society Statement to the Human Rights****
>
> Council on the impact of State Surveillance on Human Rights****
>
> addressing the PRISM/NSA case
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> Thank you Mr. President. I speak on behalf of****
>
> ______ organizations from ___ countries, across ___ regions.****
>
> This is a truly global issue. We express strong concern over****
>
> recent revelations of surveillance of internet and telephone****
>
> communications of US and non-US nationals by the government of**
> **
>
> the United States of America. Equally concerning is the****
>
> provision of access to the results of that surveillance to****
>
> other governments such as the United Kingdom, and the****
>
> indication of the possible complicity of some of the globally***
> *
>
> dominant US-based Internet companies whose services and reach***
> *
>
> are universally distributed. These revelations raise the****
>
> appearance of, and may even suggest a blatant and systematic****
>
> disregard for human rights as articulated in Articles 17 and****
>
> 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights**
> **
>
> (ICCPR), as well as Articles 12 and 19 of the Universal****
>
> Declaration of Human Rights.
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> Just last year the Council unanimously adopted****
>
> Resolution 20/8, which "Affirms that the same rights that****
>
> people have offline must also be protected online, in****
>
> particular freedom of expression ..."[1] But during this****
>
> session the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression****
>
> reported (A/HRC/23/40) worrying new trends in state****
>
> surveillance of communications with serious implications for****
>
> the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of***
> *
>
> opinion and expression. The Special Rapporteur notes that****
>
> inadequate and non-existent legal frameworks "create a fertile**
> **
>
> ground for arbitrary and unlawful infringements of the right****
>
> to privacy in communications and, consequently, also threaten***
> *
>
> the protection of the right to freedom of opinion and****
>
> expression". [2]
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> Affirmation of internet rights and freedoms by****
>
> governments in the cross regional statement on freedom of****
>
> expression and the Internet is important. But civil society is**
> **
>
> extremely concerned that governments supporting this statement**
> **
>
> are not addressing, and in fact are ignoring, the recent****
>
> serious revelations about mass surveillance in the PRISM/NSA****
>
> case. Although the personal information disclosed under this****
>
> programme is subject to the oversight of the US Foreign****
>
> Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), that court sits in****
>
> secret and has no responsiblity for ensuring the human rights***
> *
>
> of those not subject to US jurisdiction.
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> The introduction of surveillance mechanisms into****
>
> the very heart of the data streams of the globally central****
>
> service providers storing and communicating the majority of****
>
> the world's digital communications is a backward step for****
>
> human rights in the digital age. As La Rue notes: "This****
>
> raises serious concern with regard to the extra-territorial****
>
> commission of human rights violations and the inability of****
>
> individuals to know that they might be subject to foreign****
>
> surveillance, challenge decisions with respect to foreign****
>
> surveillance, or seek remedies." An immediate response is****
>
> needed.
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> We call on companies that are voluntary and****
>
> involuntary parties to the violation of the fundamental rights**
> **
>
> of their users globally to immediately suspend this practice.***
> *
>
> Such action would uphold the Human Rights Council endorsed****
>
> United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human****
>
> Rights, the “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework of****
>
> A/HRC/RES/17/4.
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> We call for protection of those who have made****
>
> these violations public. As Mr La Rue notes, laws "must not be**
> **
>
> used to target whistleblowers ... nor should they hamper the****
>
> legitimate oversight of government action by citizens." We****
>
> urge States protect those whistleblowers involved in this case**
> **
>
> and to support their efforts to combat violations of the****
>
> fundamental human rights of all global citizens.****
>
> Whistleblowers play a critical role in promoting transparency***
> *
>
> and upholding the human rights of all.
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> This recent case is a new kind of human rights****
>
> violation specifically relevant to the Internet and one****
>
> foreshadowed in the Council's 2012 Expert Panel on Freedom of***
> *
>
> Expression and the Internet. We therefore call on the Human****
>
> Rights Council to act swiftly to prevent creation of a global***
> *
>
> Internet based surveillance system. One action the Council****
>
> could take would be to follow up the Expert Panel by convening**
> **
>
> a multistakeholder process to support the recommendation of****
>
> Mr. La Rue that the Human Rights Committee develop a new****
>
> General Comment on the right to privacy in light of****
>
> technological advancements
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> [1]
> http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/G12/153/25/PDF/G1215325.pdf?OpenElement
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> [2]
> http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session23/A.HRC.23.40_EN.pdf
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> ENDS
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Gene Kimmelman****
>
> <genekimmelman at gmail.com****
>
> <mailto:genekimmelman at gmail.com> <genekimmelman at gmail.com>>****
>
> ** **
>
> wrote:
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> I'm glad to see everyone diving in on this. ****
>
> I have only one overarching issue to raise concerning the****
>
> framing of whatever groups decide to put out: I believe it****
>
> would be most powerful to challenge both the US Gvt. and****
>
> companies to explain how what they have done does NOT****
>
> constitute human rights violations, with specific details to***
> *
>
> explain their stance. I believe all the language people are****
>
> suggesting can fit within this framing, and put the burden on***
> *
>
> others to show how our concerns are not justified. This has****
>
> more to do with long-term diplomatic impact that anything****
>
> else; the debate will continue and many of the facts will****
>
> probably never be made public -- but I think it is a strategic**
> **
>
> advantage for civil society to always be calling for****
>
> transparency and basing its conclusions on both what facts are**
> **
>
> presented, and what concerns are not addressed by the****
>
> presentation of convincing arguments/facts.
>
> ****
>
> >> On Jun 9, 2013, at 8:50 PM, Jeremy Malcolm****
>
> wrote:
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >>> On 10/06/2013, at 12:47 AM, Deborah Brown****
>
> <deborah at accessnow.org****
>
> <mailto:deborah at accessnow.org> <deborah at accessnow.org>>****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> wrote:
>
> ****
>
> >>>
>
> ****
>
> >>>> In any case, we could still work on a****
>
> statement to be released around this discussion, or later in****
>
> the HRC session, which ends this week. Jeremy, have you had****
>
> the chance to work on an outline? If not, I'm happy to help****
>
> start the drafting process. My main concern is whether we have**
> **
>
> enough time for significant participation from a diversity of***
> *
>
> groups so that this is coming from a global coalition.
>
> ****
>
> >>>
>
> ****
>
> >>> Would it be OK if we copy it from the pad****
>
> to a sign-on statement on bestbits.net <http://bestbits.net/><http://bestbits.net/>
> ****
>
> 5 hours before the hearing? Those who are working on the pad***
> *
>
> can pre-endorse it there. If 5 hours ahead is not enough,****
>
> then I'll need to instruct someone else on how to do it****
>
> earlier, because I'll be in the air until then.
>
> ****
>
> >>>
>
> ****
>
> >>> --
>
> ****
>
> >>>
>
> ****
>
> >>> *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****
>
> <tel:%2B60%203%207726%201599 <%2B60%203%207726%201599>>
>
> ****
>
> >>>
>
> ****
>
> >>>
>
> ****
>
> >>> WCRD 2013 – Consumer Justice Now! |****
>
> Consumer Protection Map: https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main****
>
> | #wcrd2013
>
> ****
>
> >>>
>
> ****
>
> >>>
>
> ****
>
> >>> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org****
>
> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/><http://www.consumersinternational.org/>
> ****
>
> | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational****
>
> <http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational><http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational>
>
> ****
>
> >>>
>
> ****
>
> >>> Read our email confidentiality notice
> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality><http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>
> .****
>
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
> ****
>
> >>>
>
> ****
>
> >>>
>
> ****
>
> >>>
>
> ****
>
> >>> --
>
> ****
>
> >>> 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****
>
> <mailto:webwewant+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com><webwewant+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com>
> .
>
> ****
>
> >>> For more options, visit
> https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
> ****
>
> >>>
>
> ****
>
> >>>
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >>
>
> ****
>
> >> --
>
> ****
>
> >> Deborah Brown
>
> ****
>
> >> Policy Analyst
>
> ****
>
> >> Access | AccessNow.org
>
> ****
>
> >> E. deborah at accessnow.org****
>
> <mailto:deborah at accessnow.org> <deborah at accessnow.org>
>
> ****
>
> >> @deblebrown
>
> ****
>
> >> PGP 0x5EB4727D
>
> ****
>
> >
>
> ****
>
> >
>
> ****
>
> >
>
> ****
>
> >
>
> ****
>
> > --
>
> ****
>
> >
>
> ****
>
> > --
>
> ****
>
> >
>
> ****
>
> > Joana Varon Ferraz
>
> ****
>
> > Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS-FGV)
>
> ****
>
> > @joana_varon
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRtZurAAoJEA9zUGgfM+bq1coIAIVkFyZmO+KH/pRr0a4hXkhH
> /k4wojL3tG6WzRCY8/tP3v8NVY8L2QIG1PJoSUYw4afnrGWw2KZbEukhWpoZGm8k
> l/Bn/BWruU/4uPqGcPr8OME6oa9/CcSK/O0IQ04poiHwn0u81yzZ5BPooxKKmv7W
> bjecU0O8qwuE3YNWzNCvWJdNBAuEPg40A6Z7IjiY6w+zdLXAyaiV4XjkpWzXkNz0
> rk1kgY1LcG0c6QKdxFTAjDGRC+KUeirxRSpKEd+NdQO1dyrKH0XX82oc0J7y6ciR
> G2XLDxJULFIpHl0qBeuXPgy1883vB50RPtghRyQnRxl4rq41T9ED0UYtcOwF5Rs=
> =/bjR
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ****
>
> ** **
>
>
>
> ****
>
> -- ****
>
> Dr Marianne Franklin****
>
> Reader ****
>
> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program****
>
> Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF)****
>
> Goldsmiths, University of London****
>
> Dept. of Media & Communications****
>
> New Cross, London SE14 6NW****
>
> Tel: +44 20 7919 7072****
>
> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>****
>
> @GloComm****
>
> https://twitter.com/GloComm****
>
> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/****
>
> https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/****
>
> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org****
>
> @netrights****
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IRP mailing list
> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/irp
>
>
--
--
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/20130610/7cded56d/attachment.htm>
More information about the Bestbits
mailing list