[governance] Telecoms Package: Does the EU Council hate Freedom?

[Jeffrey A. Williams]

All,

  Seems our friends or perhaps used to be friends in the EU
are disapproving of individual freedom.  That's a shame.  Small
wonder than that ICANN has wanted to move to Geneva and out from
under the JPA.

See:http://www.laquadrature.net/en/telecoms-package-does-the-council-of-eu-hate-freedom

As the negotiations of the conciliation committee on the Telecoms
Package unfold, the Council of the European Union came up with a new,
alarming proposal. Member States offered to replace the notorious
"amendment 138" [1], an essential safeguard for citizen's freedom, with
a dangerous "knock-off" [2]. But the new version is not only
neutralizing citizens' protections adopted twice by 88% of the European
Parliament; it reduces legal protections for online activites in an
attempt to implement what looks like an open door to a repressive nightmare.

For the Council, the right to a due process, which is crucial to
preserve justice in a democracy, could be limited "in order to assure
national security, defence, public security, ***and the prevention,
investigation, detection, and prosecution of criminal offences.***".

Restricting Internet access without a prior ruling by the judicial
authorities in order to prevent and detect crime? Is this the Council's
vision for the future of European societies? It sounds for them that the
right to a fair trial shoud only be an option...

More than ever, the European Parliament must remain firm in its
commitment to protecting the freedoms of EU citizens.



Here is the full text of the Council's unacceptable proposition :

    Proposition for Article 1.3.a of the Framework directive.

    "Measures taken by Member States regarding end-users' access to or
use of services and applications through electronic communication
networks shall respect the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural
persons, including in relation to privacy, freedom of expression and
access to information and due process and the right to effective
judicial protection in compliance with the general principles of
Community law. Any such measures shall in particular respect the
principle of a fair and impartial procedure, including the right to be
heard.

    This paragraph is without prejudice to the competence of a Member
State to determine in line with its own constitutional order and with
fundamental rights appropriate procedural safeguards assuring due
process. This may include requirements of a judicial decision
authorising the measures to be taken and may take account of the need to
adopt urgent measures in order to assure national security, defence,
public security, and the prevention, investigation, detection, and
prosecution of criminal offences."

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance