[bestbits] Re: [IRPCoalition] CS statement: DNI releases Fact Sheet on PRISM, but the damage is already done
michael gurstein
gurstein at gmail.com
Mon Jun 10 07:22:16 EDT 2013
Excellent editing process... Well done.
M
-----Original Message-----
From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net
[mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] On Behalf Of Anriette
Esterhuysen
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 6:56 AM
To: Deborah Brown
Cc: Joana Varon; Marianne Franklin; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net;
irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Re: [IRPCoalition] CS statement: DNI releases Fact
Sheet on PRISM, but the damage is already done
Dear all
Here is the version that will be read. We had to shorten it so that it is
within the 2 minutes space we have.
Anriette
On 10/06/2013 12:36, Deborah Brown 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/G1215
>>> 325.pdf?OpenElement
>>>>>> [2]
>>> http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Ses
>>> sion23/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/listinf
>>> o/irp
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>
--
------------------------------------------------------
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
More information about the Bestbits
mailing list