[governance] FORMAL CONSENSUS CALL - IGC endorsement: International civil society letter to Congress
Arsene TUNGALI
arsenebaguma at yahoo.fr
Mon Jun 17 07:28:45 EDT 2013
I support this letter on behalf of Rudi International
------------------------------------------------------
Arsene Tungali,
*Executive Director,
Rudi International
email: rudi.intl at yahoo.fr
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/rudiinternational
web: www.rudiinternational.wordpress.com
*Agronomy Sciences, Goma University
Blog: http://tungali.blogspot.com/
Tel.: +243993810967, 853181857
Facebook-Twitter: Arsene Tungali
Skype: arsenetungali
Demmocratic Republic of Congo
________________________________
De : Baudouin SCHOMBE <b.schombe at gmail.com>
À : "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>; parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
Envoyé le : Samedi 15 juin 2013 12h23
Objet : Re: [governance] FORMAL CONSENSUS CALL - IGC endorsement: International civil society letter to Congress
You're right Parminder but when we make the rules of conduct in connection with the observance of human rights, we must all be considered.
SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN
Téléphone mobile:+243998983491
email : b.schombe at gmail.com
skype : b.schombe
blog : http://akimambo.unblog.fr
Site Web : www.ticafrica.net
2013/6/15 parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
>
>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
>>skype : b.schombe
>>blog : http://akimambo.unblog.fr
>>Site Web : www.ticafrica.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>2013/6/15 Norbert Bollow <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
>>>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
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130617/2eed3abe/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