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

Hindenburgo Pires hindenburgo at gmail.com
Thu Apr 17 15:43:44 EDT 2014


Dear Katitza,

I read the document "EFF and Human rights Watch Submission to the Human
Rights Committee" and I perceived that EFF and Human rights Watch are
making an extraordinary effort to restrain illegal actions carried out on
behalf of the Patriotic Act.

Apparently there is light at the end of the tunnel.
IMO the Patriotic Act and the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 practically
established a State of Exception in the USA.

Under this Act, in the name of "fighting against terrorism", the NSA can do
everything, including abusive practices of surveillance and collect massive
data. So, the state of rights practically disappeared.

Here in Brazil, we had the dark period of dictatorship (1970s), something
as a Patriotic Act was created; it was called the Institutional Act Number
5 (AI 5): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI-5. In 1978, fortunately the
Brazilian Congress with social movement eradicated the AI 5 and
restoring *habeas
corpus*.

In December 28 2012, the U.S. Senate voted to extend the FISA Amendments
Act for five years until December 31, 2017.
How Is been treated the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 by the EFF?

Hindenburgo Pires


2014-04-17 15:41 GMT-03:00 Katitza Rodriguez <katitza at eff.org>:

> I have no idea what happened on the 22nd Carolina. I haven't been able
> to track netmundial. But my colleague Danny O'brien and Gabrielle
> Guillermin (with whom we work on the paper) will be in Sao Paulo for net
> mundial.
>
> If the 22nd is a good date, we might be able to launch the paper there.
> I'll coordinate internally.
>
> On 04/17/2014 12:30 PM, Carolina Rossini wrote:
> > will this paper be presented at the German-Brazil meeting on the 22nd
> > Katitza?!
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:05 AM, Katitza Rodriguez <katitza at eff.org
> > <mailto:katitza at eff.org>> wrote:
> >
> >     Thank you, Ian.
> >
> >     We must keep pushing for the principles. They are a guiding
> principles
> >     that explain to States how to implement their international human
> rights
> >     obligations in the context of communication surveillance. The
> Principles
> >     are firmly rooted in international law and jurisprudence.
> >     EFF and Article 19 will be releasing next week the Legal Background
> and
> >     Analysis of where the language of the Principles are coming from.
> >
> >     We need a country that take the lead in implementing the Principles
> into
> >     national law, and that needs to come from the Parliament
> >     There is a lack of trust in the Executive Power within the mass
> >     surveillance debate. I don't think we will get much from a
> >     multi-stakeholder dialogue where even the Executive Power has no real
> >     knowledge of the scope and scale of mass surveillance. WE also hope
> the
> >     litigation advance, and we hope to see more judges applying those
> >     principles in the jurisprudence or more concluding observations from
> the
> >     Human rights Committee applying them (whether they cited or they
> barrow
> >     the language, which is also good to my eyes).
> >
> >     Brazil and Germany are two States that are our last hope to get them
> to
> >     do something useful and meaningful. NetMundial as minimum need a firm
> >     rejection that mass surveillance is inherently a disproportionate
> >     measure.
> >
> >     Mass surveillance, is the indiscriminate collection and retention of
> >     communications and metadata without any form of targeting or
> reasonable
> >     suspicion.
> >
> >     By its very nature, mass surveillance does not involve any form of
> >     targeting or selection,  let alone any requirement on the
> authorities to
> >     show reasonable suspicion or probable cause. Accordingly, mass
> >     surveillance is inevitably disproportionate as a matter of simple
> >     definition. The Principles reflect the above international standards
> >     under the headings “necessity,” “adequacy,” "legitimate aim" and
> >     “proportionality.”
> >
> >     People have begun to realise that the current laws of their own
> country
> >     provide only ineffective protection against mass surveillance and the
> >     laws of other countries provide them with no protection at all. The
> >     world is waking up to the reality that most governments treat the
> >     private communications of non-residents and foreign nationals as fair
> >     game. The UN Human Rights Committee has for the first time
> remonstrated
> >     the US government for failing to provide extra-territorial protection
> >     for the privacy of non-citizens and legal challenges are being
> brought
> >     against bulk surveillance of foreign communications around the world.
> >
> >     And definitely, the extraterritorial application of human rights law
> in
> >     the context of national security is an internet governance issue.
> >
> >     Given the extraordinary capabilities and programs of States (and a
> few
> >     states more than others) to monitor global communications, the right
> to
> >     privacy must apply to the communication the NSA scans or collect. To
> >     accept otherwise, it defeat the purpose and objective of the ICCPR.
> >
> >     You can read in EFF and Human rights Watch Submission to the Human
> >     Rights Committee,
> >
> https://www.eff.org/document/eff-and-human-rights-watch-joint-submission-human-rights-committee
> >
> >     and our joint submission with Privacy International, APC, Human
> rights
> >     Watch and others ot hte Office of the High commissioner on Human
> Rights
> >
> https://www.eff.org/document/ohchr-consultation-connection-general-assembly-resolution-68167-right-privacy-digital-age
> >
> >     While this is an internet governance issue too, I don't think we will
> >     solve this problem via a multi-stakeholder dialogue, though we should
> >     keep open the channel of communications with States and try to get
> some
> >     States to actually take the lead taking strong steps against the mass
> >     collection of data of innocent individuals, while we keep litigating
> in
> >     courts at national level or internationally on this issue.
> >
> >
> >     Katitza
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >     You can barrow some languages from the submissions we have made in
> both
> >     Human Rights Committee and the next report of the Office of the High
> >     Commissioner on Human Rights.
> >
> >     But this issue is not only a matter of domestic law. As we seen,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >     On 04/16/2014 06:38 PM, 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
> >     <http://necessaryandproportionate.org> principles.
> >     >
> >     > 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/
> >
> >     --
> >     Katitza Rodriguez
> >     International Rights Director
> >     Electronic Frontier Foundation
> >
> >
> >     ____________________________________________________________
> >     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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Carolina Rossini*
> > /Project Director, Latin America Resource Center/
> > Open Technology Institute
> > *New America Foundation*
> > //
> > http://carolinarossini.net/
> > + 1 6176979389
> > *carolina.rossini at gmail.com <mailto:carolina.rossini at gmail.com>*
> > skype: carolrossini
> > @carolinarossini
> >
>
> --
> Katitza Rodriguez
> International Rights Director
> Electronic Frontier Foundation
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Hindenburgo Francisco Pires

Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
Departamento de Geografia Humana
*Sítio-web: http://www.cibergeo.org <http://www.cibergeo.org>*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140417/8d7ccd95/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