[governance] Re: [bestbits] Surveillance paragraph of netmundial document

[Ian Peter]

I don’t know Parminder (and I wasnt aware of that). What I would like to see is sufficient comments and some suggestions that might provoke a discussion during the meeting rather than the words quietly being accepted. I suggested elsewhere perhaps we could call for an immediate cessation of all surveillance that did not accord with human rights provisions and privacy norms. I would just like to see which governments put up their hand to oppose an inclusion along those lines.

Ian Peter

From: parminder 
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2014 11:59 AM
To: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org 
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Surveillance paragraph of netmundial document


On Thursday 17 April 2014 04:08 AM, Ian Peter wrote:

  Hi everyone,

  To me one of the weakest sections of the document is the paragraph dealing with surveillance issues (para 35 of the Roadmap) which reads “ Internet surveillance – Mass and arbitrary surveillance undermines trust in the Internet and trust in the Internet governance ecosystem. Surveillance of communications, their interception, and the collection of personal data, including mass surveillance, interception and collection should be conducted in accordance with states’ obligations under international human rights law. More dialogue is needed on this topic at the international level using forums like IGF and the Human Rights Council aiming to develop a common understanding on all the related aspects”.

  This fairly weak language and action line (more dialogue) is not surprising given the governmental input (including US Government) into the drafting. So far the only comment on this is from me, where I suggest  reference to the necessaryandproportionate.org principles. 


You of course know that reference to 'necessary and proportionate' was there in the original draft and it got removed... What are the chances then it will be reinstated at your request?

parminder



  I think it would be useful if others commented as individuals. Perhaps what we need is some better wording (which perhaps governments would be embarrassed not to include), and which would strengthen the response here. In any case, some wording and indication of level of concern to ensure that this is discussed on the floor of the meeting rather than simply passed by as an adequate wording would be useful!


  Ian Peter

  The site for entering responses is http://document.netmundial.br/2-roadmap-for-the-future-evolution-of-the-internet-governance/




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140417/77c42939/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