[Chapter-delegates] [European-chapters] TIME SENSITIVE: French antiterrorism bill "Projet de Loi Renseignement"
Nicolas Chagny
nicolas.chagny at isoc.fr
Fri Apr 24 09:14:34 PDT 2015
Thank you Christian for this feedback.
Regards,
Nicolas
Nicolas CHAGNY
Président
Internet Society France
+33 6 74 97 82 23
www.isoc.fr
Assistante : Yoanna Hattais +33 1 55 25 50 70
yoanna.hattais at isoc.fr
Le 24 avril 2015 à 17:48:00, Christian de Larrinaga (cdel at firsthand.net) a écrit:
Nicolas
This is a bit hurried but do get in touch directly if you need something
specific. Firstly just a word of warning I am more an observer than an
actor on this issue. There are people who make this their professional
focus on one or other side of the surveillance debate.
UK has several overlapping pieces of legislation that cover
surveillance, intelligence, censorship (filtering) that deal with
terrorism as an issue in some form or another.
There are also explicit anti terrorism laws such as the Anti Terrorism
Act and laws against inciting terrorism by others which are globally
applicable. There are related laws dealing with incitement to racial and
religious hatred. (links below) Numerous examples exist where terrorism
law is used when another would have been more appropriate or no action
should have been taken. Bad drafting particularly of RIPA in 2000 which
I did argue in pubic about at the time has come back to haunt
legislators, police and general public since. It's still not right in my
view.
On scope of action. There is a case today of a 14 year old boy arrested
in the UK for inciting terrorist acts over Anzac Day in Australia. That
is the long arm of the law as it is today. (link below) Clearly based I
believe on communications data.
We have laws that allow people who have gone to Syria recently to be
arrested under anti terrorist laws.
Warrants via EU arrest warrant and Interpol for the detention of UK
suspects both en route to and on the way back from Syria. In practice
senior police are down playing this and are saying they are not
threatening returning people in a blanket way but are sifting through
them to determine those who have committed crimes abroad and should be
charged from the truly contrite "who have just made a mistake and want
to get back to their UK lives" and in particular from those intent on
carrying out terrorist related acts. This seems to be an informal
policy. Whether it stands to greater pressures I can't say.
The ISIS propaganda over facebook, twitter and similar social media is
being cited as particularly attractive to young teenage muslims with
boys lured to jihad as fighters and girls as brides for warriors. The
presence of radical people close to some mosques in the UK cities is
also being cited for recruiting even non muslims and leading them onto a
path to Syria and Iraq. The mosques official spokespeople deny these
allegations that they are encouraging such activities. Numbers of
travellers are cited in the mid hundreds. But this seems speculative at
best.
A lawyer for a family of absconding twin girls described the people
perpetrating these actions as "groomers" and similar to paedofiles. What
is clear is that social media on the Internet is central to promoting
ISIS agenda and recruiting vulnerable people to join them in Syria. Once
there they then use social media to bring more to their cause.
The use of Internet social media has become a major concern for UK
authorities and I expect French one's as well as both countries have
recent immigrant muslim populations in the millions.
Senior UK police officer stated last week they are currently taking down
1000 pieces of content every day on the grounds they are illegal under
the "Anti-terrorism Act". This is a serious escalation in content
removal for the UK.
The case of Mr. Greenwald's partner being stopped in transit at Heathrow
and having his computing devices seized was well publicised action at
the height of the Snowden story. This was done using anti terrorism law
in the UK although neither Mr. Snowden, Mr. Greenwald or The Guardian
Media or anybody associated with them was publicly accused as suspects
directly or indirectly being involved in or inciting terrorism.
This has been cited as an example of authorities over extending and
hence fudging the term terrorism to give themselves an excuse to take an
action they would otherwise might not be able to justify. I would be
surprised they could not find another law to use but the use of the
"terrorism " legislation gives them wide powers to detain and is in
itself likely to induce terror in the accused traveller.
The previous Prime Minister Gordon Brown seized the assets of Icelandic
Landskii Bank in the UK using anti terrorism legislation as the
financial banking crisis took hold in 2007/8 much to the indignation of
the Icelandic President and parliament.
Anti terror legislation was used to prevent public gatherings around
exclusion zones for certain buildings in Westminster and elsewhere and
also venues for international meetings. We have other long standing
legislation for anti social behaviour and behaviour likely to cause a
breach of the peace that has been fairly effective for century or so. I
am not clear why terrorism has become such a catch all.
The UK Parliament's surveillance committee who are tasked with oversight
over the UK's surveillance and spy agencies is the Intelligence and
Security Committee (ISC). They revealed they had been lied to by the
security agencies in what may have been almost routine behaviour.
Previous Foreign and Defence Secretaries have also commented they were
lied to (at least by omission). These people are the security agencies
"employers in chief".
Parliament has passed several terrorism related laws based on
submissions and attestations by such senior Government Ministers on the
advice of these agencies over the last forty years and have been asked
to pass even more draconian measures on such evidence that have not as
yet been passed. The so called "snoopers charter" a favourite of some
elements in the Home Office is a key example of "apparently required
powers" being justified by such "hear say" evidence.
The ISC reported in March after a long consultation that the laws
related to surveillance are over complex and require clarification and
greater transparency and controls. These controls are needed as much for
the benefit of the security agencies as for executive and judicial
oversight and democratic accountability. (link below)
They also judged the agencies are acting within the law. Presumably
lying to Parliament and their employers is not illegal.
The Law Society declared twenty years ago that the laws around
surveillance including anti terrorism are "not fit for purpose".
Their main concerns have been the undermining lawyers
confidentiality with their clients. The same issue is cited between MPs
and their constituents and journalists protecting their sources. RIPA
2000 has added even more problems to this catalogue.
The UK constitutionally consists of a balance of institutions and
interest groups asserting their own prerogatives, rights and powers.
Where one of those institutions has protected privileges such as full
visibility into the communications of the others then this could
seriously undermine this balance. It also a fact that such claim to
precedence of power by an executive agency even one tasked with
protection of the country from terrorism is also flying in the face of
the sovereignty of Parliament.
The General Election is fixed for 7th May. Campaigns have hardly touched
on the issues of surveillance or anti terrorism save concerns I've
already mentioned that vulnerable young British citizens are being
indoctrinated via online media.
So there has to be some doubt that our current legislative and oversight
in this area will be rationalised during the next Parliament as many
have recommended.
To give some direct experience. When questioned by the ISC I was asked
by several of its members how should the security agencies respond when
the Prime Minister calls them after a terrorist outrage looking for
answers if they no longer have access to the communications "meta data".
It is very clear that the agencies are addicted to meta data but it
is not clear where it is being effective or even if it has been pivotal
in any case. Much evidence that is known suggests it is a minor
contributor when compared to targeted surveillance. Home Office cites
95% of investigations use meta data. So it is clearly routine for almost
every case to snatch phone records, ISP logs, computer logs and so on.
One law that perhaps could be pinpointed for particular concern is the
RIPA of 2000. This law can force employees to act for security agencies
without informing anybody even their own employer with a penalty of
mandatory prison sentences if they do. It forces people to hand over
encryption keys and even criminalises people who forget them.
RIPA has been found to have been abused many times to use terrorism laws
to intercept journalist sources, surveillance on families on routine
domestic issues. It is no doubt also used in genuine cases of terrorism.
But the powers to imprison for failing to provide a key or in disclosing
you have been given a warrant (S49.) are a catch all and not likely to
deter a serious terrorist or criminals.
The Investigative powers tribunal established to oversee RIPA has proved
useless as an oversight mechanism which is clearly what it was meant to
be in the legislation.
To quote Wikipedia "Between 2000 and 2009 the Tribunal has only upheld 4
out of 956 complaints.[30]"
Parliament's Home Affairs Select committee has been more effective at
pointing out the bad practices and deficiencies in RIPA than most. It is
a pity they did not notice these whilst it was being drafted rather than
push for it to be created.
Looking forward to hearing how France progresses in this area and
whether we can learn some lessons from you.
Refs
Policy
Anti Terrorism Policy
https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/protecting-the-uk-against-terrorism
ISC Report https://publicintelligence.net/uk-isc-mass-surveillance/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/04/24/election_manifestos_compared_2015_uk_parliament/?page=1
Legislation
Regulation of Investigative Powers Act
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/23/contents
Anti Terrorism Act
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2001/24/contents
Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/1/contents
Think Tank / Lobby Groups
https://www.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/campaigns/surveillance/
https://www.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/campaigns/internet-freedom/
https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2015/status-of-data-retention-in-the-eu-following-the-cjeu-ruling-update-april-2015
https://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/
http://www.article19.org/data/files/pdfs/analysis/terrorism-submission-to-icj-panel.pdf
Commentary
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11051558/How-Britains-anti-terror-laws-compare.html
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/jan/13/anti-terrorism-act
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-terrorism-laws-so-broad-it-has-begun-to-catch-those-it-never-intended-to-9620867.html
RIPA Update
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/jan/14/regulation-investigatory-powers-act
Important developments in surveillance law: RIPA and CCTV
http://www.panopticonblog.com/2012/09/17/important-developments-in-surveillance-law-ripa-and-cctv/
https://p10.secure.hostingprod.com/@spyblog.org.uk/ssl/spyblog/
Legal Practice
http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/support-services/advice/practice-notes/anti-terrorism/
Court proceedings PRISM and TEMPORA: ECtHR proceedings issued against UK
http://www.panopticonblog.com/tag/ripa-2000/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Investigatory_Powers_Act_2000
Other links
14 Year old arrested in UK for Anzac Day terror plot in Australia
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/british-boy-14-arrested-in-blackburn-over-alleged-anzac-day-terror-plot-in-australia-10189084.html
ISOC UK England Parliament Meets Internet during IETF London 2014
http://isoc-e.org/parliament-meets-internet/
Christian
Frédéric Donck wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I’d like to come back on this request and provide Nicolas (Chair of ISOC
> France) with as much information as we could.
> This is a very important case for all of us and in exchanging info
> through our invaluable network, we could not only contribute to the
> French Chapter objective but also benefit everybody’s experience and
> feedback on such a sensitive issue for the Internet.
> I understand Nicolas deadline is on Saturday. thanks a lot in advance fo
> your help.
>
>
> Best Regards
> Frederic
>
> Frederic Donck
> Director European Regional Bureau
> Internet Society
>
> www.isoc.org
>
> De: Nicolas Chagny
> Date: 22 avril 2015 at 09:55:24
> À: chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> >
>
> Sujet: [Chapter-delegates] French antiterrorism bill "Projet de Loi
> Renseignement"
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I suppose you know the French parliament is close to vote another
>> antiterrorism bill, called "Projet de Loi Renseignement".
>> You can read an editorial of the New York Times here :
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/01/opinion/the-french-surveillance-state.html?_r=1
>> (EN)
>> And a news of Le Figaro here :
>> http://www.lefigaro.fr/secteur/high-tech/2015/03/23/01007-20150323ARTFIG00102-le-combat-solitaire-des-opposants-au-projet-de-loi-renseignement.php
>> (FR)
>> (with Frederic Donck inside !).
>>
>> There is a global mobilization of french civil society and NGO against
>> this law.
>> The Internet Society France has made some propositions :
>> http://www.isoc.fr/actualites-isoc/communique-loi-renseignement
>>
>>
>> Saturday afternoon, I will participate to a debate.
>> And I think to write an editorial with international point of
>> view about this kind of law.
>>
>> So I need you and I would like to know :
>> - if there is a similar law in your country ?
>> - what are the feedbacks about this law ?
>> - do you have statistics or « ROI » information about this law ?
>>
>> Thank you very much.
>>
>> Warm regards,
>> Nicolas
>>
>> *Nicolas CHAGNY*
>>
>> *Président
>> Internet Society France*
>> +33 6 74 97 82 23
>> _www.isoc.fr
>> _
>>
>> *Assistante : *Yoanna Hattais +33 1 55 25 50 70
>> _yoanna.hattais at isoc.fr _
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
>> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer of the European
> region you are automatically subscribed to this list,
> which is regularly synchronized with the Internet
> Society Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
-- Christian de Larrinaga FBCS, CITP, MCMA ------------------------- @
FirstHand ------------------------- +44 7989 386778 cdel at firsthand.net
-------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20150424/20e7c5d8/attachment.htm>
More information about the Chapter-delegates
mailing list