[IRPCoalition] [bestbits] [IP] DNI releases Fact Sheet on PRISM, but the damage is already done
Norbert Bollow
nb at bollow.ch
Mon Jun 10 06:09:51 EDT 2013
+1
Greetings,
Norbert
Am Mon, 10 Jun 2013 09:43:33 +0000
schrieb Rikke Frank Joergensen <rfj at humanrights.dk>:
> 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>
> <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net><mailto: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>
> <mailto:genekimmelman at gmail.com><mailto: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>
> <mailto:deborah at accessnow.org><mailto: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>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>> 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/><http://www.consumersinternational.org/>
> |
> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational<http://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>
> <mailto:webwewant+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com><mailto: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>
> <mailto:deborah at accessnow.org><mailto: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><mailto: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<http://www.internetrightsandprinciples.org>
>
> @netrights
More information about the Bestbits
mailing list