[governance] FORMAL CONSENSUS CALL - IGC endorsement: International civil society letter to Congress

Riaz K Tayob riaz.tayob at gmail.com
Sat Jun 15 06:25:23 EDT 2013


For me going forward, the issue is the ability of the US to go forward 
at simultaneously as a democracy and human rights defender and promoter, 
as well as a 'violator' of it.

The US state is one of the most remarkable ones in the ability to handle 
contradictions of this nature... there are numerous examples of this...

This dualistic politics is what will be interesting. It is what makes 
sensible for me the protection of American's 'rights' over those of 
foreigners - as the discourse is unfolding.

 From my Third World perspective, this would be the frame of analysis. 
Allowing us to see the consequences of the dichotomies, and 
contradictions in this process...

Riaz
On 2013/06/15 12:35 PM, parminder wrote:
>
> On Saturday 15 June 2013 02:49 PM, Baudouin SCHOMBE wrote:
>> I support this statement. After all, no one can pretend to be above 
>> the law.
>
> When there is no global law then it is more difficult to say no one 
> can be above the law.... and there is no global law to constrain the 
> US from doing what it would with the centres and nodes of the Internet 
> which it occupies.... We can though keep talking about the much 
> fancied but meaningless bottom up processes here.... parminder
>
> parminder
>> It is a principle as old as democracy in advanced democracies, 
>> prinicipe must constantly remain in our minds and reflexes whatever 
>> our geographical situation and who we are.I support this statement. 
>> After all, no one can pretend to be above the law. It is a principle 
>> as old as democracy in advanced democracies, prinicipe must 
>> constantly remain in our minds and reflexes whatever our geographical 
>>  localisation and who we are.
>>
>> SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN
>>
>> Téléphone mobile:+243998983491
>> email                  : b.schombe at gmail.com <mailto:b.schombe at gmail.com>
>> skype                 : b.schombe
>> blog                    : http://akimambo.unblog.fr
>> Site Web             : www.ticafrica.net <http://www.ticafrica.net>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/6/15 Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch <mailto:nb at bollow.ch>>
>>
>>     > > 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/dbab8d22/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