By our Europe correspondent Matthijs Nieuwenhuis*
17-07-2008
Europe should join in the struggle against censorship on the Internet. And political dissidents who use the Internet to promote their cause should be protected from authoritarian regimes. A group of MEPs feels we should follow the US and establish guidelines for the net.
More and more countries are limiting their citizens' freedom of speech online. Moreover, western businesses are regularly put under pressure to provide information about dissidents who use the internet as a tool for spreading information. Not a good development says Jules Maaten (pictured), Dutch MEP for the Conservative VVD party:
"For example, servers should not be located in internet-restricting countries. We believe that there should be transparency. If governments with whom European or western companies do business ask you to filter the internet or to provide certain information, this should become transparent. It should be reported. We are asking the European Commission to provide money to develop tools with which censorship of the internet can be circumvented. And we believe that exports of software or hardware to internet-restricting countries should be subject to a human rights impact assessment."
Guidelines badly needed
The American company Yahoo! is an example of a company which succumbed to pressure from Beijing, providing information on the dissident Shi Tao, simply because it had a server in China. Reporters without Borders, an organisation which monitors press freedom throughout the world, has welcomed the European initiative. Clothilde Le Coz from the organisation says:
"It's an ever-increasing problem. If you take the example of Yahoo!, it gave the personal data of one of its clients who has been condemned to ten years in prison. Their data made it possible for the Chinese government to arrest and condemn him. That kind of collaboration we just don't want in Europe. In 2000 we only had to watch Vietnam, Saudi Arabia and China, but now 15 to 20 countries are imposing state control on the internet."
Exacerbating the situation
The US authorities have spent four years drawing up guidelines to tackle internet censorship in the Global Online Freedom Act (GOFA). MEP Jules Maaten has just returned from Washington, where he held talks with Republican Congressman Chris Smith on the subject. Mr Maaten presented the EU GOFA version modelled on the American legislation on Thursday.
But if European and American businesses are restricted in their dealings with regimes like China, Myanmar and Tunisia, surely these regimes can find alternatives on the home market? Wouldn't that potentially exacerbate the situation? Mr Maaten doesn't believe that's a valid argument:
"Well they can do that already now. The reason why they want the technology from Europe or the United States is that it is better technology. If their own technology improves at some point, they don't need us anyway."
For now, it's a question of waiting to see if the European Commission comes up with proposals or adopts Jules Maaten's draft. Either way, it's likely to take years before concrete action is taken.
* RNW translation (jn)
Tags:
censorship,
China,
Europe,
Internet,
Saudi Arabia,
US,
Vietnam,
Yahoo!
Rik van Riel,
30-07-2008
- USA
Meanwhile, politicians from Europe, the US, Canada and several other countries are secretly drafting the ACTA (anti-counterfeiting trade agreement), which looks like it would put force internet providers in Europe and the US to put in place much stricter censorship than even China has today.
The ACTA treaty is being negotiated in total secrecy (apparently the negotiators had to sign an NDA), so the only available info is leaked and there is no chance for public participation on this legislation.
GOFA seems to be nothing more than a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
Dick Udell,
18-07-2008
- USA
The Internet should NOT be regulated in such a manner as to prohibit free speech and freedom of expresion as long as it remains civil, non-abusive, and does not advocate terriorism and overt criminal activity! However there should be provisions to mark "Spam' in such a manner that such unwanted material can not be forwarded in the future. There is no reason why a person should be forced to browse through hundreds of 'Spams' each day, some of them doubled, tripled, or sent several times once, each day! This in no way inhibits 'freedom of choice' as one need only visit Google, or any other search engin, and find exactly what they want! In addition, for consideration, video games which advocate and teach overt criminal activity, should be prohibited and made illegal! There are plenty of patriotic and adventuresome games such as 'Ban of Brothers'; 'U-Boat'; 'Luftwaffe'; 'Red Baron', plus Board War Games such as, 'Battle of North Africa', 'Battle of Midway', etc., and in all of these, one can play either side!
T. M. NADAR,
17-07-2008
- INDIA
I agree that freedom to free flowing information to people of the whole world must be ensured in an I. T. age so that all attempts by countries and politians to divide people on the basis of caste, creed, religion, place of birth etc. will gradually stop.
