Proposals to curb online speech viewed as threat to open internet
Proposals to curb online speech viewed as threat to open
internet
By Yasmeen Abutaleb and Alastair Sharp
June 21, 2016
SAN FRANCISCO/ TORONTO (Reuters) - At least a dozen
countries are considering or have enacted laws restricting online speech, a
trend that is alarming policymakers and others who see the internet as a
valuable medium for debate and expression.
Such curbs are called out as a threat to the open
internet in a report on internet governance set to be released today at an
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development meeting in Cancun,
Mexico.
The report, reviewed by Reuters, warns of dangers for the
global internet, including intrusive surveillance, rising cybercrime and
fragmentation as governments exert control of online content.
It was prepared by the London-based Chatham House think
tank and the Centre for International Governance Innovation, founded by former
BlackBerry Ltd co-chief Jim Balsillie.
China and Iran long have restricted online speech. Now
limitations are under discussion in countries that have had a more open
approach to speech, including Brazil, Malaysia, Pakistan, Bolivia, Kenya and
Nigeria.
Advocates said some of the proposals would criminalize
conversations online that otherwise would be protected under the countries'
constitutions. Some use broad language to outlaw online postings that
"disturb the public order" or "convey false statements" -
formulations that could enable crackdowns on political speech, critics said.
"Free expression is one of the foundational elements
of the internet," said Michael Chertoff, former U.S. secretary of Homeland
Security and a co-author of the internet governance report. "It shouldn't
be protecting the political interests of the ruling party or something of that
sort."
Turkey and Thailand also have cracked down on online
speech, and a number of developing world countries have unplugged social media
sites altogether during elections and other sensitive moments. In the U.S. as
well, some have called for restrictions on Internet communications.
Speech limitations create business and ethical conflicts
for companies like Facebook Inc, Twitter Inc and Alphabet Inc's Google,
platforms for debate and political organizing.
"This is the next evolution of political
suppression," said Richard Forno, assistant director of the University of
Maryland, Baltimore County Center for Cybersecurity. "Technology
facilitates freedom of expression, and politicians don't like that."
"FIGHTING DELINQUENCY"
Tanzania and Ethiopia have passed laws restricting online
speech. In others, including Pakistan, Brazil, Bolivia and Kenya, proposals are
under discussion or under legislative consideration, according to a review of
laws by Reuters and reports by Internet activist groups.
In Bolivia, President Evo Morales earlier this year said
that the country needs to "regulate the social networks." A bill has
been drafted and is ready for introduction in the legislature, said Leonardo
Loza, head of one of Bolivia's coca growers unions, a supporter of the
proposal.
"It is aimed at educating and disciplining people,
particularly young Bolivians, and fighting delinquency on social
networks," Loza said. "Freedom of expression can't be lying to the
people or insulting citizens and politicians."
A bill in Pakistan would allow the government to block
internet content to protect the "integrity, security or defense" of
the state. The legislation, which has passed a vote in Pakistan's lower house
of parliament, is supposed to target terrorism, but critics said the language
is broad.
It comes after Pakistan blocked YouTube in 2012 when a
video it deemed inflammatory sparked protests across the country and much of
the Muslim world.
Earlier this year, YouTube, which is owned by Google,
agreed to launch a local version of its site in the country. But now, the
internet report said, the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority can ask the
company to remove any material it finds offensive.
COMPANIES IN THE CROSSFIRE
U.S. internet companies have faced mounting pressure in
recent years to restrict content. Companies' terms of service lay out what
users can and cannot post, and they said they apply a single standard globally.
They aim to comply with local laws, but often confront demands to remove even
legal content.
Comments
Post a Comment