Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Why Reporters Without Borders is not endorsing the Global Principles on Freedom of Expression and Privacy, by Francis Chartrand
Why Reporters Without Borders is not endorsing the Global Principles on Freedom of Expression and Privacy for ICT companies operating in Internet-restricting countries?
Reporters Without Borders welcomes the adoption of the Global Principles on Freedom of Expression and Privacy as a first step towards ICT companies’ recognition of the importance of free expression while operating in Internet-restricting countries. The international press freedom organization recognizes the important work done by the participants of this multi-stakeholder initiative that gathers companies, academics, investors and NGOs. Nevertheless, after participating in the discussions for almost two years, Reporters Without Borders decided last September to withdraw from the discussions and to not endorse those principles.
The organization believes these principles are one step in the right direction, but they do not go far enough to provide a sufficient protection to freedom of expression on the Internet.
"Under these principles, another Shi Tao case is still possible" stated Reporters Without Borders referring to the jailed Chinese reporter whose verdict revealed that Yahoo ! gave some personal identifying information to the Chinese authorities. "We believe that, as of today, the best option to prevent IT companies from being forced to collaborate with the Web-censors in repressive countries remains to provide a legal framework for companies willing to resist governments’ requests that violate the international free speech standards, as the Global Online Freedom Act, introduced by Representative Chris Smith does for American IT firms", commented the press freedom organization. "We will follow the implementation of the principles and are willing to continue to take part in this interesting collaboration and exchange of ideas, but in a different capacity. We stand ready to be, as a third party, of any assistance to the Initiative should our expertise or input be needed. We have been monitoring the free flow of online information for years and we will continue to denounce the obstacle to online free speech", added Reporters Without Borders.
Reporters Without Borders is concerned by several loopholes and weak language on the central points that may threaten the very implementation of these principles and justify the status quo. It also regrets the fact that some sensitive issues related to the monitoring process remain yet to be addressed.
Here is an overview of the organization’s main concerns:
1 - Local law remains the reference even if it violates international human rights standards. Thus, participating companies will comply with repressive regimes who have at their disposal an arsenal of legal provisions aimed at silencing dissidents.
2 - The extent to which companies are expected to challenge governments’ requests remains unclear. Requests in writing are sought but not mandatory.
3 - Companies could still enter into business relationships (joint ventures, mergers) with local partners that do not follow the principles, then bypass the restrictions imposed by the principles and blame the local entity (such as Alibaba for Yahoo!) in case of violations of freedom of expression or collaboration for the arrest of dissidents.
4 - Disclosure to users and transparency regarding the type of personal information retained by ITC companies’ remains unsatisfactory.. Users have no assurances that companies will try to minimize data collection, nor do they know how long this data will be saved.
5 - The assessors’ independence and impartiality as well as the extent to which companies’ will provide them with the necessary information to monitor developments remains uncertain.
Reporters Without Borders has supported the Global Online Freedom Act (GOFA) since its birth. Introduced by Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ) in February 2006, it would protect American IT companies from being forced to collaborate with repressive regimes. The Act would prevent repressive governments - those that punish dissidents and human rights activists who exercise their right to online free expression - from accessing personal data through US companies.
The bill would ban companies from locating the servers containing this data and from providing information that identifies users, except in cases in which the law is being legitimately applied, to be decided by the US justice department. The US companies would also have to act transparently and transmit information about the type of censorship they apply to an interagency-staffed Office of Global Internet Freedom, which would have the job of defining US government policy for the promotion of the free flow of online information and monitoring violations. A feasibility study of technologies and equipment’s export control would also be made. The bill also promotes the idea of a voluntary code of conduct to be established for companies working in countries with repressive regimes. GOFA was approved by the House’s Foreign Affairs Committee in October 2007 and is now awaiting a floor vote. In July 2008, MEP Jules Maaten, initiated the European Global Online Freedom Act (EU GOFA), which was drafted out of the American GOFA, and whose goal is to protect European ICT firms doing business with répressive regimes.
Link
# posted by Francis Chartrand @ 1:13 AM 
