[bestbits] Re: [IRPCoalition] CS statement: DNI releases Fact Sheet on PRISM, but the damage is already done
Anja Kovacs
anja at internetdemocracy.in
Mon Jun 10 06:40:44 EDT 2013
Many thanks from my side as well to all of you for for making this happen.
I think the final version of the statement is excellent!
Warmly,
Anja
On 10 June 2013 16:06, Deborah Brown <deborah at accessnow.org> wrote:
> Thanks Joana!
> Just a quick note to explain that the statement will be made on behalf of
> APC because as an ECOSOC accredited org they are able to make interventions
> and have graciously facilitated and contributed this intervention. We have
> asked the speaker from HRW to take a look at the the Best Bits link for the
> current list of signatories before reading it at the afternoon session 1500
> Geneva time, so she will be able to say that she is making the statement on
> behalf of xx orgs from around the world. So please make sure you endorse
> the statement at http://bestbits.net/prism-nsa/
>
> I will begin adding those of you who already endorsed it, so look for a
> confirmation email and click the link.
>
> Jeremy, can you fix the layout and footnotes when you have a chance?
>
> Thanks to all of you for helping to make this happen in less than 24 hours
> across many time zones.
>
> Best,
> Deborah
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Joana Varon <joana at varonferraz.com>wrote:
>
>> Dear Anriette and all,
>>
>> Thanks a lot for all the work that has been made in such a short period
>> of time. This was amazing!
>> Here is the link for the next endorsements:
>> http://bestbits.net/prism-nsa/
>> Please, let's spread it!
>> best
>> joana
>>
>> --
>>
>> Joana Varon Ferraz
>> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS-FGV)<http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts/>
>> @joana_varon
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all
>>>
>>> Thanks for all the inputs. We have tried to include them all.
>>>
>>> Here is the final text that will be uploaded to the HRC site and read
>>> later today by Human Rights Watch on APC's behalf. We have included
>>> signatories as available now. Deborah will coordinate adding further
>>> names.
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> Anriette
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/06/2013 11:40, Marianne Franklin wrote:
>>> > 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:
>>> >>>
>>> > 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>> 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>> 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>> 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/> 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/> |
>>> > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational
>>> > <http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational>
>>> >
>>> > >>> Read our email confidentiality notice
>>> > <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>.
>>> > >>> 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>
>>> > >> @deblebrown
>>> > >> PGP 0x5EB4727D
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > > --
>>> >
>>> > > --
>>> >
>>> > > Joana Varon Ferraz
>>> > > Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS-FGV)
>>> > > @joana_varon
>>> >
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>> --
>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IRP mailing list
>>> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>>> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/irp
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Deborah Brown
> Policy Analyst
> Access | AccessNow.org
> E. deborah at accessnow.org
> @deblebrown
> PGP 0x5EB4727D
>
--
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/20130610/bb07500d/attachment.htm>
More information about the Bestbits
mailing list