[governance] paras 61 and 66 (cybercrime and security)

Ralf Bendrath bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de
Wed Oct 19 08:12:39 EDT 2005


(I have changed the subject line - hope it helps to focus)

Robert Guerra wrote:

>>>The open paragraph is 61.  I don't know which govt supported or not.

> Para's 60-62 were dealt with the working/drafting group chaired by  
> Canada if i'm not mistaken.
Yes.

> Members of Drafting group: At least ones that I can remember -  
> Norway, Australia, EU, US, Iran, China, Brazil, there were more..
Pakistan, El Salvador, ...

> Rusia and the EU were the two battling things out. US intervened  
> often as well.
Paragraph 61 actually got stuck in a discussion between the US and Iran on 
the last evening. The US want to delete any reference to new mechanisms. 
Their goal is to have the Council of Europe Cybercrime convention as the 
only tool, have all governments join it, and instead focus on cooperation 
of law enforcement agencies. Iran wants to keep the option of developing 
regional cybercrime frameworks different than the Council of Europe 
Convention. Russia also was opposing the Convention, but could apparently 
live with "noting" instead of praising it.

> The text was almost agreed to on the 2nd session. Rusia and the EU,  
> well - re-opened things...
IIRC it was the US, who made a new proposal for the whole para. That is 
the second part in brackets.

> - para 61 : it's kind of agreed to. That being said, i would suggest  
> two possible options:
> 
> a. Reject the para all together : Make a statement - CS does not  
> agree with the spirit of the para. then, suggest anything we want
> b. Try to be constructive:  shorter, not longer. Remove references to  
> things we don't like, but don't add anything new. To add something  
> new, would be to have our suggestion not looked at .

I agree. Would prefer option a), but believe option b) is more viable.

I have asked the Privacy and Security Working Group for more comments and 
concrete language suggestions, also on para 66. Will let you know what our 
members say.

Ralf
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance



More information about the Governance mailing list