[governance] FORMAL CONSENSUS CALL - IGC endorsement: International civil society letter to Congress
parminder
parminder at itforchange.net
Sat Jun 15 02:58:50 EDT 2013
On Saturday 15 June 2013 11:27 AM, Imran Ahmed Shah wrote:
> Dear Norbert,
> Should we also address the same concern with UN General Assembly?
Interesting question.... That was my initial feeling about writing to US
Congress.... I dont feel that it feels accountable to non US citizens,
and all the pronoucements from the US post PRISM disclosures confirm
that.... We should appeal to those who are show some feeling of
accountability to us... At the global stage, that is the UN, and UN
GA.... I think we must write to them.
That is also my problem with the ISOC statement in the issue, they speak
about global principles on privacy etc developed at plurilateral forums
- most of the rich nations - which exclude most of us... They speak of
the need of a global dialogue that should take place on he issue (and I
agree) but dont say where it should take place. I reckon, if I direct
this question to them they'd say, the IGF. Which is very well. But the
next question is, subsequent to such a dialogue, and as an outcome of
it, where should development of global principles for privacy etc should
take place - to which I would almost certainly not obtain any reply...
Although I am willing to be proved wrong - by ISOC or any of its
sympathisers here.
I dont agree with statements that may merely do what seem to have become
difficult to ignore, without clear political direct for the
corresponding required political actions... This is the doctrine of
political responsibility that we, at my organisation, take really
seriously, and we think all civil society should. We have here not to
make just statements, we are here to change the world in a manner that
it becomes more fair to those who are marginalised at present.
I think we should all begin to act less like second class US citizens,
begging for at least some recognition, and behave like global citizens
of a globally democratic polity. The biggest lession from the recent NSA
disclosures is this: unaccountable power will also certianly go
corrupt..... Make sure anyone who exercises global power - as the US
does to a extremely momentous extent - must be made 'globally'
accountable. And any such accountability can only be exercised through a
mechanism where everyone from across the globe is equally represented...
Lets write to the UN assembly too...
parminder
> B/R
> Imran
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch>
> *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> *Sent:* Saturday, 15 June 2013, 5:09
> *Subject:* [governance] FORMAL CONSENSUS CALL - IGC endorsement:
> International civil society letter to Congress
>
> > > http://bestbits.net/prism-congress/
>
> [with IGC coordinator hat on]
>
> FORMAL CONSENSUS CALL
>
> We have had quite a few expressions of support for the “International
> civil society letter to Congress” already, and no objections so far.
>
> Please review the proposed statement text as included for reference
> below.
>
> If you agree with the proposed statement or are indifferent about it,
> there is no need to take action about it at the current stage.
>
> If however you disagree with IGC expressing support for this
> letter, it
> is now the final opportunity to object if you wish to do so.
>
> ** Any objections should be posted by Monday June 17, 9am UTC. **
>
> If no objections are received by that time, IGC endorsement of the
> proposed letter will be deemed to have been decided by consensus.
>
> NOTE on potential further steps in the decision-making process: If
> there
> are any objections, we will then discuss how to proceed.
>
> Greetings,
> Norbert
>
> -- text proposed for endorsement
> follows--------------------------------
>
> Civil society letter to United States Congress on Internet and
> telecommunications surveillance
>
> Members of US Congress:
>
> We write as a coalition of civil society organizations from around the
> world to express our serious alarm regarding revelations of Internet
> and telephone communications surveillance of US and non-US citizens by
> the US government. We also wish to express our grave concern that US
> authorities may have made the data resulting from those surveillance
> activities available to other States, including the United
> Kingdom, the
> Netherlands, Canada, Belgium, Australia and New Zealand.[1] Many
> US-based Internet companies with global reach also seem to be
> participating in these practices.[2]
>
> The introduction of surveillance mechanisms at the heart of global
> digital communications severely threatens human rights in the digital
> age. These new forms of decentralized power reflect fundamental shifts
> in the structure of information systems in modern societies.[3]
> Any step
> in this direction needs to be scrutinized through ample, deep and
> transparent debate. Interference with the human rights of citizens by
> any government, their own or foreign, is unacceptable. The
> situation of
> a citizen unable to communicate private thoughts without surveillance
> by a foreign state not only violates the rights to privacy and human
> dignity, but also threatens the fundamental rights to freedom of
> thought, opinion and expression, and association that are at the
> center
> of any democratic practice. Such actions are unacceptable and raise
> serious concerns about extra-territorial breaches of human rights. The
> inability of citizens to know if they are subject to foreign
> surveillance, to challenge such surveillance, or to seek remedies is
> even more alarming.[4]
>
> The contradiction between the persistent affirmation of human rights
> online by the US government and the recent allegations of what appears
> to be mass surveillance of US and non-US citizens by that same
> government is very disturbing and carries negative repercussions
> on the
> global stage. A blatant and systematic disregard for the human rights
> articulated in Articles 17 and 19 of the International Covenant on
> Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which the United States is
> signatory, as well as Articles 12 and 19 of the Universal Declaration
> of Human Rights is suggested. Bearing in mind that the US must engage
> in a long overdue discussion about how to update and modernize its
> policy to align with its own founding documents and principles, what
> happens next in legislative and Executive Branch oversight in the US
> will have huge and irreversible consequences for the promotion and
> protection of the human rights of people around the world.
>
> It is also notable that the United States government supported the
> United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution 20/8, which “[a]ffirms
> that the same rights that people have offline must also be protected
> online, in particular freedom of expression …”[5] and, just a few days
> ago, on June 10, the US was part of a core group of countries that
> drafted a cross regional statement, which correctly emphasized “that
> when addressing any security concerns on the Internet, this must be
> done in a manner consistent with states’ obligations under
> international human rights law and full respect for human rights must
> be maintained.”[6] That was apparently not the case with the latest
> practices of the US Government. Besides representing a major violation
> of fundamental human rights of people worldwide, the incoherence
> between practices and public statements by the US also undermines the
> moral credibility of the country within the global community that
> fights for human rights, as they apply to the Internet and fatally
> impacts consumers’ trust in all American companies that provide
> worldwide services.
>
> On 10 June, 2013 many signatories to this letter joined together to
> raise our concerns to the United Nations Human Rights Council.[7]
> We did
> so against the background of the recent report of the UN Special
> Rapporteur on the right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Mr.
> Frank
> La Rue.[8] This report detailed worrying 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. We note
> that US-based stakeholders have also written a letter to Congress to
> express their concerns about the compliance of the current national
> surveillance program with domestic law.[9]
>
> We are also extremely disappointed that, in all the post ‘disclosures’
> statements, US authorities have only insisted that there was no access
> obtained to content related to US citizens, and just their
> communication meta-data was collected. There has not been a word
> on the
> issue of large-scale access to content related to non US citizens,
> which constitute an almost certain human rights violation. The
> focusing
> of the US authorities on the difference between treatment of US
> citizens and non-citizens on an issue which essentially relates to
> violation of human rights is very problematic. Human rights are
> universal, and every government must refrain from violating them for
> all people, and not merely for its citizens. We strongly advocate that
> current and future legal provisions and practices take this fact into
> due consideration.
>
> We therefore urge the Obama administration and the United States
> Congress to take immediate action to dismantle existing, and prevent
> the creation of future, global Internet and telecommunications based
> surveillance systems. We additionally urge the US Administration, the
> FBI and the Attorney General to allow involved or affected
> companies to
> publish statistics of past and future Foreign Intelligence
> Surveillance
> Act (FISA) requests they have received or may receive.[10] We further
> call on the US Congress to establish protections for government
> whistleblowers in order to better ensure that the public is adequately
> informed about abuses of power that violate the fundamental human
> rights of the citizens of all countries, US and other.[11] We also
> join
> Humans Rights Watch in urging the creation of an independent panel
> with
> subpoena power and all necessary security clearances to examine
> current
> practices and to make recommendations to ensure appropriate
> protections
> for the rights to privacy, free expression, and association. The
> results of this panel should be broadly published.
>
> [1]
> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d0873f38-d1c5-11e2-9336-00144feab7de.html,
> https://www.bof.nl/2013/06/11/bits-of-freedom-dutch-spooks-must-stop-use-of-prism/
> and http://www.standaard.be/cnt/DMF20130610_063.
>
> [2] Including Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype,
> YouTube, and Apple:
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html
>
> [3] http://www.state.gov/statecraft/overview/
>
> [4] (A/HRC/23/40)
>
> [5] http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?si=A/HRC/RES/20/8
>
> [6] http://geneva.usmission.gov/2013/06/10/internet-freedom-5/
>
> [7] http://bestbits.net/prism-nsa
>
> [8] (A/HRC/23/40)
>
> [9] Asking the U.S. government to allow Google to publish more
> national
> security request data
> http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/asking-us-government-to-allow-google-to.html
>
> [10] https://www.stopwatching.us/
>
> [11] The just-released Global Principles on National Security and
> Freedom of Information (the Tshwane Principles) which address the
> topic
> of Whistleblowing and National Security provide relevant guidance in
> this regard:
> http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/Global%20Principles%20on%20National%20Security%20and%20the%20Right%20to%20Information%20%28Tshwane%20Principles%29%20-%20June%202013.pdf.
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
> To be removed from the list, visit:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130615/a6b202fa/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
More information about the Governance
mailing list